The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-08-09
Tho Attempt to Replace Diversity
with Uniformity.

The decision OF the Supreme Court Of
Errors OF Connecticut on Saturday, that
a marriage ia dissoluble under the laws
of that State when one Of the parties Is
an epileptic who by falsely representing
his physical condition induces woman
to marry him, presents one OF the diff
culties which will vex the commissioners
of States who are about TO assemble to
devise a plan for uniformity in the di-
vorce legislation Of the Union.
The marriage laws of the States will
first need to be brought into something
like unifo rmity. In Connecticut, as
that decision recites. the marriage Of
epileptics is forbidden by statute, the
penalty for violation Of which Is fine and
Imprisonment, and the marriage is dis
soluble when it is induced by such fraud
ulent representations as were alleged in
the case under consideration.
Many Of the States have marriage
laws which are peculiar to them. For
example, Minnesota besides Connecti-
cut, forbids the marriage Of epileptics.
The marriage OF lunatics is void in Ken
lucky, Maine, Massachusetts and Ne
braska; of persons having certain con-
stitutional diseases, in Michigan. In all
the States except New Jersey, New York,
New Mexico and South Carolina mar
riage licenses are required. Generally
in the Southern States, and also in Cali
fornia, Colorado, Idaho, Indiana, Ne
braska, Oregon and Utah, marriages
between whites and persons Of negro
descent are prohibited; in North Caro-
lima, Oregon and South Carolina, be-
tween whites and Indians; in California,
Mississippi, Oregon and Utah, between
whites and Chinese. Marriage between
first cousins is forbidden in fifteen States,
and marriage with step-relatives in all
the States except Florida, Iowa, Ken
lucky, Minnesota, New York, Tennessee
and Wisconsin.
It will be seen that in the State OF New
York none Of these prohibitions is made.
As has been said of this State, it is the
easiest in which to get married and the
hardest in which to get out of the con-
tract, for here the only ground Of di-
vorce allowed is adultery. But no mar
riage license is required and there is no
legal prohibition against the marriage
of whites with negroes, Indians or Chi
nese, with first cousins, step-relatives or
persons diseased.
Any attempt by the commissioners on
uniformity of legislation to get rid Of
such restrictions is bound to be unsuc-
cessful. The preservation of race purity
in the South is Of passionate concern
there, and also in the far Western States
which forbid the intermarriage of whites
with Indians or Chinese. The prohibi-
ton of marriage which threatens the
propagation Of Jdsense, mental or ply
steal, is also urged on scientific grounds,
and those States which have enacted it
are not likely to recede from their policy.
The modern tendencyis rather to extend
it as a means of protecting the human
breed from deterioration.
We have before explained that with the
exception Of two States only, New York
and South Carolina, the legal causes OF
divorce are various in the Union. De-
sertion Is allowed az a cause in all the
rest, and other causes besides adultery
in all except New Jersey. Habitual
drunkenness is made cause in nearly
all, and cruelty also.
/ In view Of these variations concerning
both marriage and divorce it is not sur
prising that efforts to bring about uni
| formity Of legislation on the subject,