The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1904-01-16

courts in 1901 amounted to 72S, which,
is an average of one and fraction
for every 10000 families. OF these 72S
separations, 444 were arranged by
mutual consent between husband and
wife, while less than 100 were based
on infdelity and desertion. Figures
such as these are far more convincing
than any words could be as to the lack
OF any popular desire in Italy for the
enactment of divorce laws. The stat
istics show similar condition of af-
fairs in Spain and in Portugal, the only
other countries in the world where
laws of divorce do not exist. The
average demands for separation and
the proportion of the latter to the
number of marriages is pretty much
the same in Spain and Portugal as in
Italy, and when one compares these
returns with the appalling quantity of
divorces that are granted each year in
the United States, every divorce mean
ing the destruction of home, one is
forced to come to the conclusion that,
after all, the Italians, the Spaniards
and the Portuguese are wise in declin-
ing to adopt series of laws which
tend to impair the family principle,
which is the elementary basis of patri-
otism.
In Austria very curious state Of
affairs exists with regard to divorces.
The laws providing for the latter are
OF an extremely restricted nature, as
they only permit the courts to grant
divorces to Protestants and Jews.
Roman Catholics as such have no legal
redress in the nature of divorce either
in Austria or in Hungary, and if
Roman Catholic couple wish for a
divorce they must both of them be-
come converts either to Professionalism
or to Judaism before the courts will
declare themselves competent to deal
with their cases and to grant them
full-aedged divorce.
In England, during all the earlier
part of the reign of Queen Victoria,
divorces were far more difficult to OBJ
tain than they are to-day. In fact,
the dissolution of marriage entailed
so much trouble and, above all, so
much expense, that it was only the
very rich who could afford to indulge
in such a luxury. And these were in
a measure discouraged therefrom by
the attitude of Queen Victoria, who up
to ten or fifteen years before her death
declined to receive at court any woman
who had figured in divorce case. But
when by means of acts of Parliament
divorce was brought within the reach
OF the masses and ceased to be restrict
ed to the wealthy, public opinion, which
until then had supported the queen in
the stand which she had taken, be-
came more lax, and even took the
ground that, since divorce was author
lied by the law of the land, it should
be recognized and tolerated as such by
both the church and the crown. It
was in Difference to this sentiment that
the queen toward the last became
more lenient towards divorces, several
OF whom were received at court, while
others still were admitted to the hon.
ors of private presentation. This
naturally helped to still further re-
move the prejudice against divorce,
and to-day there remains but little Of
the old time rigor formerly manifested
toward women who had figured in
divorce cases.
1t is the same in Germany, in France,
in Scandinavia and in Switzerland. Or
the continent, indeed, divorces are SO
frequent among the reigning houses
that it would be almost matter Of
impossibility to adhere to any rule Of
barring Divorces from court or to
maintain the social ostracism to which,
divorces were formerly subjected,
OF course, it may be said that in this
royalty has merely drifted along with
the tide of popular sentiment. But it
is impossible to refrain from the be-
lief that if the rulers of the Old World
had adhered to their former principles
and set their faces against those who
had courted publicity and aired their
matrimonial woes in the courts, div
orce would be less fashionable and in
consequence thereof, less frequent than
it is nowadays in all the monarchicaf
countries of the Old World save those
which are free from this danger
namely, Spain, Portugal and, in a
minor degree, Austria Hungary and
Russia.