The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1903-03-10

Such a law would bring a laxity. or
morals in North Carolina equalled no
where under the SUM-. Marriage is sane
toned by the Bible. The Jews allowed
divorces for many causes. but 1t was
not for abandonment. He quoted the
Savior's words about a bin Of divorce
ment and spoke earnestly OF the evils
arising from divorces. Dur criminal
laws are based upon the Ten Command
ments. and when a law is made against
adultery it is from the Seventh Com
mandment.
To the sixteenth century there was
no divorce. Then it was the cause be
fore the marriage. some disability. some
Incompetence. hat allowed this. There
were no divorce laws in England until
1857, and in North Carolina until after
1914. North Carolina made these under
the common law and there were none
of these divorces before. no court having
Jurisdiction. The first divorce for the
Scripture cause in North Carolina was
declared void, because il was granted
before the law was made and that was
not retroactive.
Here Senator Henderson quoted from
an opinion by Judge Pearson in what is
known as the Dickinson case. making
its application clear as TO the invalidity
of an ex post facto law.
Section go of the Code. he claimed,
gave divorce. He declared that he did
not believe the people of North Carolina
wanted any such law. and the ministers
did not want anything which tended 70
laxity in marital relations. II this law
is TO relieve a few. why not make il n
perpetual law that will give relief 10
all?
The loose avs tolerating divorce, he
said, tended to immortality, and it would
be OF vast injury to have such laws IN
North Carolina.
Senator Gillian spoke for the bill. He
said he did not consider it a bill for tho
relief of worthless husbands, but a hill
for the relief OF good women abandoned
by prohigate husbands, hundreds, per-
haps thousands OF whom are crying for
thu relief afforded by this bill. 1t was
not a bill to make divorces, but a bill
to give a relief that is sadly needed.
Declaring that it did not make for di-
vorce, he said it was impossible to con-
ceive that it would relieve a worthless
man and not an innocent woman.
The only other argument was that of
the lowering Of moral sentiment, but OPP
posed to this would be the actual relief
to the innocent who suffered. The act,
he declared, was we'll guarded. 1t was
framed most carefully. 1t gives the
judge the right to set aside the verdict
Of the case is not meritoriOus.
Senator London said that he differed
from Senator Gillian, and that it was
not a bill to give relief to the innocent,
but to relieve worthless men. On the
statute books is a law granting divorce
from bed and board, but it did not give
the opportunity for a new marriage.
Gillian: For the protection Of So
ciety do you not think that an absolute
divorce would be preferable"
London: ~ do not regard any divorce
as to be preferred. This bill encourages
divorces. 1t gives the opportunity for
marriage again" He did not believe
that marriage is a matter of convenience.
but a matter of sanctity. He declared
the bill set a dangerous precedent and if
enacted would make North Carolina
known as South Dakota and its Infamous
career. The laws Of divorce were a
remnant OF Populism. and he urged that
none % these be allowed on the statute
books. He said that he begged and i'm
plOred that no ckW step be taken
in North Carolina on the divorce uurs-
ton.
Senator Brown declared that he had
always voted against divorce laws, but
that this was a simple, plain one, that
promised to give relief. AS he regarded
it it would give relief to many women
WHO were tied to brutes and ours. He
denied that it would affect future legis-
latfon as to divorce, and said that the
passage would not make North Carolina
a South Dakota. He saw no harm in
the bill, urged that all amendments be
Killed and that the bill pass.
Senator Vann said that he was afraid !
OF any divorce law. AS to future legis- |
latures not being weak two years ago
the legislature had declined to pass a !
divorce law. With the change of Sena- |
tor Brown he believed the legislatures
was growing weaker. When the bars |
were let down it was no telling where It |
would end. The law was not wanted for
under it North Carolina might become as |
South Dakota. and it was a DANCE; o s
thing to start. 1t would make young
people familiar with it and tend to dis
organize society, because of the IA
miliarity. |
Senator Travis again spoke for the !
Dill. He denied the statement of Sena-t
tor Henderson that riminal law was
founded on the Bible. That was to turn
one cheek when the other was struck !
III the INV now tOld q man to defend !
himself. The bed and board separation |
spoken of by Senator London was q
mutual separation, but it did not 90 far
enough. He urged that the amendment
be voted down and the bill passed.
Senator Baldwin withdrew his amend |
ment, saving that he was opposed to di-
vorces and did not want to vote for the
bill even with it. |
Senator Henderson moved to amend
by repeating all laws concerning divorce.
This was lost.
he onered another amendment This |
being that an absolute divorce in an
other State or country shall be valid in
North carolina. but if a citizen goes
from this State to get q divorce If shall
not be lawful in North Carolina. The
amendment was lost.
Again he offered an amendment that if
snail be the duty Of the Clerks of Court
TO furnish each year a list of the parties
divorced to the Acknowledgement. who
shall keep a book of these for public
information. 1t was lost.