The times., 1901-06-23
The validity of Foreign Divorces.

Daily average Sunday, 1873 excepted. 5000
The validity of Foreign Divorces.
A late decision of the Appellate Dl-
vision of the Supreme Court in BROOK
lvn. New York, brings up again the
rnuch-mooted question of the valid
itv of interstate divorces. There has
always been much indisposition on
the mart of American State courts 10
recognize as valid against bona fde
residents of the state divorces obtained
in other States. The decisions EoIolnS
sucb divorces to be invalid have been
nut upon many different grounds, put
in general they have rested upon the
theory that the courts of particular
state cannot render a decree that VIII
affect the legal status, outside OF that
State, of a person who has never re-
sided therein, or who has never been IN
any way brought within the jurlsdic-
ton of the court rendering the decree
In many of these foreign divorce
cases the element of fraud or supposed
fraud in obtaining the decree has also
been a prominent feature. In some re-
cent cases the Supreme Court OF the
limited States followed, in general
way the rule which has usually gov
erned in the State courts; but as each
case has been decided upon its own par
ticular facts. cases are constantly arls-
ing for which no precedent can be
found.
In the latest New York case New
York woman obtained a divorce in
Massachusetts. while her husband was
q resident of New York. AT the time of
the divorce he was poor man. But
later he married again. and became
wealthy. Upon his death the wife
who had obtained the divorce in Mas
sachusetts claimed dover rights. The
court held that the Massachusetts di-
vorce was invalid and decreed the
dover as claimed.
In part. the New York decision is
said to rest upon the ground that the
divorce was obtained for a cause not
recognized by the laws of New York
extreme cruelty. But behind this must
lie the ultimate question of jurisdlc-
ton. If both parties had resided in
Massachusetts and there was no defect
in the process by which the court OBJ
tained jurisdiction OF the parties, and
no actual fraud, the decree would have
been good everywhere, no matter upon
what grounds" the divorce was grant
ed-provided they were valid grounds
in Massachusetts. Hence, it would
seem that the husbands continued res
idence in New York must have been
the main factor in determining the ac-
ton of the court. and the question
was. after all. a jurisdicional one.
But there Is another and very pecu-
liar feature to this case. The unwill-
ingness of the courts to recognize di-
vorces obtained in other States has re-
suited from a desire to protect its own
residents from judgments obtained
against them in other States. In this
case, however, the court protected the
wife from a judgment rendered in her
own favor and which she herself had
deliberately obtained. The justice Of
such ruling may well be questioned.
In effect, it relieved the first wife
from the consequences of her own
wrongful act, and at the same time
made invalid the marriage OF the sec
ond wife, who, 50 far as appears, had
done nothing wrong. Besides, it made
illegitimate the innocent offspring Of
the second marriage, If there be any.
In such a case the principle of estoppel
might. with the utmost propriety,
have been invoked and applied to shut
out the claim for dower-especially as
the rights Of other and innocent parties
had superyened.
This case illustrates most strik;nely
the need Of uniform laws on the subject
of divorce. There is no more impoI-
tant relation in life than that which
is created by the marriage contract.
The Legality Of the marriage and the
legitimacy of children should, so far
as possible. be relieved Of every doubt.
It is difficult 10 imagine anything more
distressing than for good woman, the
mother Of a family, suddenly TO dis
cover that the ceremony under the
sanction Of which her children were
brought into the world was not in fact
a marriage, that she is not and has
not been a wife. and that her chill
dren have no legal right 10 bear their
fathers name. Equally distressing and
humiliating it is 10 the children them
selves.
The remedy generally proposed is
that Of national law Of divorce, MAX
ing the proceedings uniform IN all OF
the States. Much can be said in favor
Of such q law. Possibly the end might
be reached through a general codifica-
tion Of the laws OF the various States
by commission in which each State
was represented But, however opin-
ions may differ as to the plan to be
adopted. all must agree that present
conditions are altogether unsatisfac-
tory and that some remedy should be
found.
Mr.. WanamaIHer's Second Offer.