Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1904-01-11

murder in one state and then run away
another state governor will recognize
your extradition papers and allow you
to be forcibly returned to the place
where you committed the crime.
Divorce Laws ShozSd BE Uniform.
We recognize the necessity of con-
certed action between states on the
murder question. We recognize also
the necessity of concerted action be-
tween different nations and widely
separated authorities in cases of theft
as well as murder. A few years ago
all that cashier had to do after
wrecking a bank was to cross the Cana
dian line and he was safe. Ontario
and Quebec and Montreal were ''cities
of refuge" crowded with fugitives
from American justice. Hundreds of
defaulters from Chicago and New York
and San Francisco and other cities
were living there, gloating over their
crimes. But now men guilty of finan-
cial crimes legally have no escape A
criminal in the United States is GRIM
inal in England, a criminal in Canada
forgery and theft there must be con-
certed action between nations as we'll
as states. Why, in the same way,
should there not be concerted action
between states in reference to the di-
vorce law? But though concerted and
state courts should be regarded as a
necessity yet we find the actual condi-
tons just the reverse. To illustrate
how man can defy the divorce courts
of one state by living in another state,
a prominent member of the Presby-
terrain general assembly committee told
me that short time ago a man died in
the United States and left three legal
widows. He left three widows, and
he was not a believer in Brigham
Young either! How was that? A few
years ago this man went to a western
state and there settled and married
After awhile he became tired of his
wife and decided he would marry an
other woman. So this man left the
state where he was then living and
went into another state, got divorce
and there remarked. OF course the
state of his former residence did not
recognize the second marriage.
Time passed on, and this husband
tired of his second wife. He moved to
another state, got a divorce and mar
ried third wife The marital disease
with him by this time was becoming
chronic. But now neither the first nor
the second state where he used to live
recognized his third marriage as legal.
Time passed, and this husband of
many wives died What was the re-
suit? Each of his former marital COM
panions inherited the property of the
dead man which then existed in her
own state! By law that man in three
different states left three different
wives, each a legal wife in her own
state, but illegal in the other two
states. Such is an instance of the
ridiculous and infinite absurdities eX-
listing between the conflicting divorce
courts of our land. But there must be
a legal change. The divorce question
will never be dealt with as it should be
so long as a married woman living in
New York city can go and spend a few
weeks in western state and then take
train and go back to her old home
another mans wife. Concerted legal
action must be established between the
states. 1t is you, Christian people, to
whom God assigns the duty of arOusing
public sentiment against this evil and
compelling our national and state legis-
lators to take such action as will result
in making the marriage altar some
thing more than a mere mockery.
Flood of National Infamy.
A second breakwater to dam back
this submerging flood of national in
fanny 1t is for the gospel ministers to
protest against it by practice as we'll
as by preaching. The pulpit cannot
speak loudly and with the voice of a
true leader unless at the same time it
refuses to become a party to the ma
tional crime of easy divorce. What do
l mean by this statement? That the
minister himself shall not be blatant
and ii brutal divorce? Oh, no. No self
respecting Christian church would al
low her minister to continue preaching
in her pulpit after a divorce escapade.
Paul writes, "A bishop must be blame
| less, the husband of one wife" No
minister's life can be blameless when
he turns his back upon his first wife
| for an unjust cause. But do mean
this: A minister should not officiate at
the second marriage of a Divorce un-
less he himself knows positively that
the divorced man was not culpable in
the swapping of the marital bonds. BY
such ministerial course public senti-
ment would be aroused against this ma
tional evil. and aroused quickly and
| permanently.
l have taken only lately this stand in
reference to the clergyman's RESPONSE
bility Like hundreds and thousands
of other ministers l have heretofore
said to myself: i am not in any way
compelled TO look into the personal char
acters of those whom | unite in mar
riage. When | used to live in New
! Work ta I had 70 81 tho contra pting