The herald., 1897-05-17
around the country for a marriage H.


cense.
But it will. doubtless, be a matter of
some interest to those couples who have
set the law at defiance and who ignored
the warning given by The Herald, to
know that marriages such as theirs have
been pronounced invalid by competent
judicial authority. There is law in the
state Of Washington similar to the one
recently passed in this state, affecting
the marriage of divorced persons, with
the exception that there the limit OF
time Is only six months. At Tacoma
recently Judge Kean decided that the
law held good with residents of tina,
state, mot only in but outside it's linn
the divorce is absolute and complete In
all other respects, yet on the right to
marry again the decree Is held in sus-
pension for the period of time defined by
law, and Is not, to that extent, absolute
until the time has expired.
Such being the case. divorced person
In this state is for the twelve months
following the date of decree incapaci-
tated to marry, and has no legal capacity
tc contract a marriage, and the rule
that marriage legal and valid in the
legal everywhere does not apply. The
decision of Judge Kean has invalidated
scores of marriages in the state of WASH
ington, for the easy divorce law at
tracted many persons from other states
and frequently persons were divorced
one day and married outside the state
the next. 1t is rather without the mark,
however, to say Judge Kean's decision
'invalidated" any marriages, for as q
matter of fact they always were invalid
The court simply interpreted the law,
and brought under the notice of persons,
so eager to crafty their own feelings
that they failed to stop ore moment and
think of what they contemplated doing.
the consequence of violation of the
law.
DIVORCED FROM THE DEAD.
1t is curious. too, in cases of divorce to
no heit oiruccwcmaf7statlclAf0C Cf
notice how circumstances altogether
was made in The Herald of woman
whose husband had returned to his old
home at Buda-Pesth, Hungary. She
obtained a divorce from him about six
weeks ago and desired to marry again,
but the recent law placing the twelve
it's" The question was decided in the
Marquardt case, the court following the
line of reasoning laid down by the stats
supreme court in re the Smith estate.
1t is thus held that where divorce is
granted with a prohibition against the
remarriage of either of the parties until
after the expiration of a certain period of
time from the date of the decree, while
months limit stood as a bar in her way.
Investigation revealed the fact. how
ever, that her hus band has been dead for
about two years, and the divorce she
bad obtained was in reality a superflu-
GUS proceeding. Had she not instituted
the proceeding she would have been able
to obtain the coveted license, but having
obtained her divorce from man who
piration of twelve months unless she
proceedings set aside.
In contrast with this case is the decree
OF the circuit court at st. Louis annulling
the marriage Of Ransom A. Walker and
Margaret Walker of Boune Terre, Mo,
and authorizing Mrs. Walker to resume
her former name Of Margaret Marler.
Walker and Mrs Marlar Wara rriad
married in 1912. Previous to her mar
riage to Walker. Mrs. Marler was draw
ing pension for the death of her first
husband, and on learning her last mar
riage was illegal she applied for resto-
ration of her pension as the widow of
j. j. Marler. her first husband. 1t was
held, however, that this could only BE-
done after the last marriage had been
declared void by decree of court. Suit
was accordingly instituted, and the de-
cree was granted. This is probably the
first case of record where an action of
the kind was begun wherein dead man
was deliberately made party to the
action.