The Birmingham age-herald., 1902-11-28
Cynthia Westover Alden in the New York American.

York American.
 1 HOSE of us who have never had kO the practical problem of divorce
 forced on us by an unhappy marriage are little too prone to be un- sympathetic. It is easy for the wen-fed judge to pronounce sentence on the woman who has stolen loaf of bread to feed her starving babes
 A warm hearthstone lends unreality to thoughts of other peoples chilly discom- fort. At merry table the loneliness of the desert, of the convent, of the mon- astery seems like the ghost stories of our childhood.
 Yet every man and woman who thinks must understand that divorce in some form is an inevitable incident of mar riage laws such as civilization approves; that divorce properly regulated Is saliva tion from greater evils both for the race and for the individual.
 Yes, believe in a uniform law, and I think 1t much more likely to be se- cured by amendment to the federal con- stitution than by voluntary agreements
 
 precedent for charges of government in the latter way. There are fifteen prec- edents for a change in the former. Any uniform system to be effective must cover marriage as we'll as divorce laws.
 It seems unwise to put too many me- chanical restrictions about marriage For example, a twenty-five-year age limit would license, condore, almost justify lib- ertinism.
 property standard would be even worse A man Is able to support a wife when he Is earnest, honest and in- dustrious. No matter how much property he may have, he Is not fit to support her lacking these qualifications. And one bad day in Wall street may wipe out his fortune, no matter how large. A settle ment on the wife would be no guarantee, since in nine cases out of ten she would trust her money to her husband volun- rent to marriage. and therefore a bad thing for the community.
 In considering this whole subject we must remember that in our system it ia practically impossible to force marriage on man or woman. It may be encouraged or discouraged. That is all
 l sometimes think that our legislators in following what is called the movement for the enfranchisement of woman, in freeing the wife's property from the hus- bands control, while he cannot sell a square inch of real estate without her consent; in making separations making separations with alimony too easy, have done a doubtful service to woman.
 How much of the indispostion of young men of property and prospects to marry is due to this disturbing of the common law balance cannot esti- mate mathematically. No one can. But that this is a real element in their state of mind I have not the shadow of a doubt.
 The proper aim of the legislator, of the law-interpreter as well as the law maker, Is to distribute evenly the bur dens and the benefits of matrimony. and not to make either man or woman shrink from the arrangement as one-sided bargain.
 Where the marriage of convenience persists, the prospects of the young man and the definiteness of the obligations he assumes are balanced up against a dot.
 Here public sentiment and the law both discourage the dot, but the obligations of the husbsnd are just as real and just as permanent; and under prevailing decisions in most of our states they are no longer met and equaled by the obligations of the wife.
 She can legally run her husband into debt to any amount and he has no de- ferse. Manifestly, with the limited op- portunity he has for knowing the real woman before he marries her, he must choose between utter reck1essness on the one hand and taking the unknown for the horrible, with consequent shrinkage from marriage, on the other.
 Under our laws, as construed in this so-