Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1904-01-14

dian line aud he was safe. Ontario
and Quebec and Montreal were cities
OF refuge" crowded with fugitives
from American justice. Hundreds Of
dcfaulters from Chicago and New York
and San Francisco and other cities
were living there, Sloatinc over their
crimes But now men guilty. Of fnan-
cial crimes legally have no escape. A
criminal in the United States is a csin-
inal in England, q criminal in Canada
Is a criminal In France 70 suppress
forgery and theft there must be con.
certed action between nations as well
ms states. Why, in the same way.
should there not be concerted action
vorce law? But though concerted and
harmonious action by the different
state courts should be regarded as
necessity yet We flnd the actual condl-
tons Just the reverse. 70 illustrate
how a man can defy tho divorce courts
OF one state By living in another state.
a prominent member Of the Freshly
terinn general assembly committee told
me that short time ago a man died in
the United states aud left three legal
widows. He left three widows, and
he was not a believer in Brigham
Young either! How was that2 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 10 this man left the
state where he was then living and
went into another state. gut A 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 divorce nnd mar
RED a thirG wife. The marital disease
with him by this time was becoming
chronic. Eut now neither the first nor
the second stats where he used +. go
recognized his third marriage az leg
Time passed, and this husband o.
many wives died. What was the re
suit? Each Of his former marital com
panionH 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
state. but illegal in the other two
states. Such IL an instance Of the
ridiculous and INFINITE absurdities OK
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 II should be
so long as a married woman living In
| New YORK city can 20 and spend few
| weeks in a western state and then take
train and 50 back to her old home
another mans wife. Concerted legal
action must be established between the
states. 1t il you. Christian people to
whom God assigns the duty Of arousing
| public sentiment against this evil and
compelling our national and state lecis-
lators to take such action as will result
in making the marriage ALTA some
thing more than mere mockery.
Flood Of National Infamy.
A second brcakwater to dam back
this submerrinx hood Of national IN
fanny 1t is for the gospel ministers to
protest against 1t by practice as we'll
as by preaching The pulpit canno.
speak loudly and with the voice Of
true leader unless At the same time It
refuses to become party to the ma
tional crime OF easy divorce What d.
mean By this statement: That TIE
minister himself shall net be . blatant
and brutal d. ,rcec' Oh. no. No self
respecting Christian church world nj
low her minister ia continue preaching
in her pulpit after divorce escspad,
Paul writes. "A bishop must he blame
less the husband of one wife" No
minister's life can he hlameles. when
he turns his back upon his first wife
for an unjust cause. But I do mean
this: A minister should not of11ciate at
the second marrie 60 Of a divorce un.
less he himself knows positively that
TIE divorced man was not culpable in
the swapping of the marital bonds. BY
such q ministerial course public sent-
mcnt would be aroused against this ma
tonal evil, and aroused quickly and
permanently.
I have taken only lately this stand in
reference TO the elcrgyman's ro7ponsi-
bi!ity. Like hundreds and thousands
of other ministers I have heretofore
said to myself: 81 am not in any way
compelled to look into the personal char
acters Of those whom l unite In mar
rlase When used to live in New
York state had to ask the contracting
parties a long list Of questions and
make a report to the county odicials in
reference 10 the same But in the state
ef Illinois the clerk Of the county court
does that He asks the questions He
gives the license. He is responsible
for the marriage. and not l." But A
short time ago, when talking to a
brother minister upon the subject, he
said: You ara wrong You cannot
sh!rk your responsibility in that way"
Thsu | commenced to look at this re-
} vronsimlity in another way. said to
} myself: Yes, I am wrcng. That coun-
} ty clerk cannot tell me what I ought
to do, The paper he sends to me Is only
a license, a governmental privilege. per
} nit1ing me to marry the parties il
J wish. am not compelled 10 to do
For instance: The saloon keeper gets a
city liesnas ana has the privilege OF
, selling me a glass Of whisky. But BE-
; cause It is lawful for me to buy whisky
from him that 10 no reason why |
should drink it. Because the spsrtinl
| al -.