The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-05-21
A JUST DECISION.


The decision Of the supreme court in
reviewing the Stocking divorce case
seems to be one which on its face IS
worthy Of the highest commentator.
Without regard to the bearing Of the de-
cision on the relation of the parties to
the action, the dictum of the court as to
what course of conduct on the part of q
husband toward his wife will Justify her
leaving him without enabling him after
wards to secure a divorce on the ground
of desertion points clearly to a just pro.
lection of the rights Of the wife.
The language Of tho court Is that,
Amy rule which will permit the hus-
band to enter upon a course of conduct
toward wife which is humiliating, insult
ing and degrading. and thereby drive her
from him Cunless she be a stolid and
spirftless animal with wants
pirations above physical comfort) and at
the expiration Of the year come into
court and claim a divorce on the ground
of her Willful desertiOn, If his misconduct
does not legally entitle her to one, tends
directly to the degradation Of woman
hood and enables him to take advantage
or his own wrong doing"
The last legislature extended the period
d
divorce from one year to two. The ex-
tension was directly In the line Of the re-
form Of our divorce system. The further
Limitation established by the supreme
court on the right to secure a divorce
on this ground will be heartily concurred
In. The conduct Of one of the parties to
marriage toward the other may be ut
terly insufferable. 1t may result In a
separation, for the protection of the In
jured party. without rendering that party
liable to have divorce obtained against
him or her on the ground Of desertion.
This is the effect Of the decision of the
supreme court In the Stocking case
The claim Of the party applying for the
divorce on the ground of desertion was
| that the ill-treatment which caused the
separation must have been such as to
justify divorce on the ground OF cruel
\ and inhuman treatment. If the separa-
ton is not legally to be regarded as de-
serdon. This view the trial court seems
| to have sustained. Such decision is &C
cordingly overruled by the supreme court.
1t would be hard indeed, If a wife were
compelled to endure a husband brutality
until it should reach such a point that
| she is able to establish that she is en-
| titled to a divorce on account OF it, be-
fore she is permitted to live separately,
| except at the expense Of having her mar
/ riage dissolved. Women are often ILL
| treated by brutal husbands under such
| circumstances as render it almost i'm
possible for them to establish such Ill
| treatment in court. A man may In the
! privacy of their home be brutal toward
| his wife. and even apparently affectionate
in the presence of other parties. thus
rendering it practically impossible for her
| to invoke the intervention of the court
! While the general tendency Of the de-
| cisions of our courts has been in the line
| of the supreme court decision in this
case, rather than In that OF the conten-
ton Of the trial court. it is in the interest
of sound public policy to have tho law
! as clearly stated as it has been In this de-
| cision.
i