The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1905-12-21
SEXTON MUST PAY
Let No Man Put Asunder i.
Decreed by Supreme Court.
DECIsIoNoF GREAT INTEREST
Miss Blanche Sexton Receivers from
Father-in-Law for alternating Hus-
bands Affections.


bands Affections.
The Supreme court this week affirm.
ed the decision of Judge 2. A. Church
in the case of Sexton VS.. Sexton. This
I being case brought in the Ida county
court by Blanche Sexton against he,
father-in-law John D. Sexton, fol
damages for alternating her husband
affection for her. The case was tired
in the lower court, Mr.. P. w. Hard
ing being the attorney for the plain
tiff and F. E. Gill of Sioux City, and
w. E. Johnston of Ida Grove, the at
torneys for the defense. The result
was a verdict for Mrs. Sexton for
$500. The case was appealed and the
Supreme court affirms the decision.
Mrs. Sexton is we'll known in this
county and is at present a highly re-
spected teacher in our rural schools.
The daily papers comment on the de-
cision as introducing new and more
liberal construction of the right of the
husband or wife to reveal marital sec
rets to jury.
The following is from the Register
and Leader of Des Moines:
The supreme court of Iowa this
week construed that provision of the
law which protects confidential COM
munications between wives and hus-
bands. A liberal construction of it
was made and step forward in this
respect was taken by the court, judged
by former standards in Iowa and in
many other states.
The law prohibits the revelation by
wife or husband of any communica-
tion'' made by one to the other during
the time they sustain marital relations,
and this inhibition persists after the
relation has been severed.
In the case in question wife sued
her husbands father for damages for
alternating his affections from her.
She attempted to testify in court as to
the acts and words of affection which
had been hers before the alleged in
reference of her father-in-law, and
which ceased on account Of his alleged
interference. To this the father-in-law
objected and when the woman recover
ed large verdict from him in the
lower court he appealed.
The law construed is section 1907 of
the code, as follows:
A. Neither husband nor wife can be
aexaminsd in any case as to any COM
m,lnication made the one to the other
while married, nor shall they after
the marriage relation ceases, be per
mitted in testimony to reveal any such
communications made while the mar
riage relation subsisted"
The decision was in the case OF
Blanche Sexton against James Sexton,
ST., appellant, from Ida county. Mrs.
Sexton sought to show the status Of
the feelings of her after marriage and
following interference between them
by the father-in-law even to the ex-
tent of introducing letters written by
one to the other. To all this the at.
torneys for the father-in-law objected
on the ground that these all were
privileged and confidential ommunica.
tions, inquiry into which was prohibi.
tion by the section quoted.
RULING OF COURT.
Constituting the statute, the court,
in part, says:
No more is required than that the
confidence inherent in the marital re-
lation or incident thereto should bt
fully protected.
There can be no reason arising ou
of public policy or otherwise requiring
that every word spoken between hus
band and wife shall be privileged ire
spective of the presence in which
spoken, or the subject, or occasion
thereof.
The privilege shall be construed tt
embrace only the knowledge which tn,
husband or wife obtains from tn
other, which, but or the marriage re
lation and the confidence growing ou
of it, would not have been communi
Gated, or which is of such nature o
character as that to repeat the sam
would tend to undully embarrass or dis
turb the parties in their marital rela
tions.
1t is the. martial communication
q
then, that is sought to be protecte
and this is so because there is no pur
pose of public policy to interfere, ex
..cept to guard and foster the MARTA
relation.
otherwise, saidssthe court, it..woul
be impossible to inquire of spouse a
to conversation carried on before
third person and thus clearly not con
"