The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-02-08
DIVORCE QUESTION
SETTLED AT LAST
CONTINUED from 1st page.)

this house but thinks that in some cases
of abandonment, divorce shall be granted.
This substitute, / think, provides the best
solution of this question, and is just
measure. Some members say they are in
favor of following the Bible alone; il that
were done, there would be three causes in
our Code that would have to be abolished.
If We will look around we will see that
there are cases of abandonment and it is
to the best interests Of society and good
morals that divorce be granted. The good
judgment of our courts is the safe guard.
Mr.. Craig of Buncombe: / submitted
the substitute, and after long consider
alton by the committee, it was recon-
mended instead of the original bill. Now
there seerls to be an idea that this sub
stitute is intended to break up homes.
No man is farther from such thing than
II am. The censJjn,an frdm Wslstia
has said that this measure would first
separate the man and wife, and then bring
them together in jail; but it would do
nothing of the kind.
A great deal has been said about laws
of divorce from Deuteronomy down
will say that there is not a country of the
civilized world that has not passed laws
granting divorce, except South Carolina
and Mississippi.
We live in the Christian dispensation,
but we don't make laws according to the
New Testament. / wish we could.
Mr.. Curtis, of Buncombe: But does not
the gentleman think we ought to come as
near to the law laid down in the New
Testament as possible?
Mr. Craig: do and think this substi-
tute does come as near as possible. Do
you hold that the law of this common
wealth should hold the innocent party
responsible for the guilty. That is not
the spirit of the New Testament. 1t was
not the practice of the Master when he
rebuked the storming of the woman.
am not trying to break up the Heaven
or earth. as some one has called ii.
OF the happy home but ! am trying to
break up this hell on earth Discourage
the breaking up of homes by Furnishing
the guilty parties, and not those who are
innocent and faithful to the vows of ma
trimony.
Judge Graham, of Granville: | simply
wish TO sustain the amendment offered by
the gentleman from Wake. Our lax di-
vorce laws are a disgrace to our State.
and stencil in the nostrils In Granville
there have been II divorces in ten years
in Edgecombe over go and in Wayne over
20.
In Wake, the increase is charming, and
often at one term of court they will grant
1S to 20 bills for divorce
1t was my misfortune to have to grant
the first divorce under that law of 1895.
Although convinced that he was not en-
titled to divorce. | was compelled to
sign the paper Since then we have been
letting down the bars, until the last Leg
islature made the time of abandonment
onl yone year. All of these laws have
been made to apply to caes then pending,
showing that they were passed in the
interest of individual cases. Now, We
lvnplAIpug 10 lunoooe no smBI ssgd louuBo
hardships.
The gentleman from Harnett, day be-
fore yesterday. went back to the Mosaic
Law, and / listened with wonder at his
remembrance of all those cases and allu-
sion as they have been collected in this
book from the library by Mr.. Aaron, a
Jewish lawyer of Philadelphia.
Mr. Spainhour, OF Burke: / favor the
substitute offered by Mr.. Craig. | don't
think we ought to be more pious than
our religious denominations.
Mr.. Mclean: You say you are a men,
Der of the church; don't you think you
ought to follow in the footsteps of the
Master?
Mr. Spainhour | do.
Mr. Mclean: Do you think He would
favor that substitute?
Mr. Spainhour: / do All of our relig-
ious denominations would exclude any man
abandoning his wife for three years The
gentlemen from Scotland and Wake
would be the best ones to stand up and
defend such man, when he had violated
the sacred VOWS he had solemnly pledged
to keep. I believe that, for the good OF
society for the sake OF the innocent
parties, such statute as this substitute
should be upon our books.
Mr. Curtis: The gentleman from Har-
nett has said that we can't legislate NOR
ais into the people. No, If | thought our
laws were all vain in encouraging good.
would draw my pay up-to-date and go
home whenever we pass laws making
divorces easy we are encouraging easy
marriages.
Mr.. Britain, of Randolph: Every law
of God and every law of man is against
these lax divorce laws. There never were
such loose divorce laws in the State as
we're passed by the Fusion Legislature.
| am opposed to divorce for any cause
save the one. am opposed to a judge
deciding upon divorces, as provided in this
substitute.
In my experience. the man is generally
TO blame. / venture to say that nine men
out of ten in this House have wives bet
ter than themselves. We must remem-
Der. in making these laws, we are enact
ing them for men. and not for women.
Mr.. Britain then quoted from the Code
Of South Carolina, showing that there
were laws against farnication and adul-
terry, Notwithstanding what the gentle
man from Harnett had said. He further
showed that North Carolina was no bet
ter in these regards than South Carolina
that the morals of the people of North
Carolina were no better than those of the
people of South Carolina.
Mr. Gattis, of Orange: Do you think
the loose morals are because of the lax
divorce laws, or on account of the dis
pensary?
Mr.. Britain: / can't say. am not
in favor of the dispensary.
Mr.. Gattis: am opposed to the sub
stitute of the gentleman from Buncombe
to the amendment of the gentleman from