The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1906-12-29
DR.. MKIM PROTESTS
Opposes Change in Divorce
Laws of District.
WOULD WORK AN INJURY
Clergyman Declares That Adoption
of Proposed Legislation Could Only
Mean "A Step Backward in Morals of
COmmunity-WOuI Not BE Accept
able to the Best Elements.

Rev. DR.. Randolph H. Mckim, rector
of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the
Epiphany. d close student Of canon law
and an authority on religious subjects,
gave out an interview yesterday regard
ing the proposed changes In the laws Of
marriage and divorce Dr. McKim said:
1t has been said in the press that the
gentlemen. who attended the recent ma
tional congress on uniform divorce
laws, have recommended to the District
Commissioners radical changes in the
laws of this District relating to marriage
and divorce.
The practical effect Of the adoption Of
these changes would be TO make divorce
about as easy as 1t was up to the year
1911. when the present law was adopted,
limiting absolute divorce to the single
cause Of infidelity Il is earnestly 20 be
hoped that the Commissioners will not
approve this recommendation. 1t will be
a long step backward I'm the moral
standard of this community. It will be
a return to a condition in relation to this
vital matter which made the law in this
city a scandal.
Not Acceptable to Best Element.
Il do not believe the proposed changes
viii be acceptable to the best elements in
this community. I am certain that they
will be resolutely opposed by the whole
Episcopal Church. l believe they will
also be opposed by the Presbyterian.
Methodist, and Baptist churches, and
trust by all other religious denominations
in the community
we may recall the fact that no sooner
had the law OF, 1901 been put in the
statute book than a determined effort
was made TO have it Tescinded by the
next session Of Congress and the old
law re-established. That movement met
with strong and united opposition from
the Christian element in this community.
NearIy all. il not quite ALL the churches
in the District threw their influence into
the scale against the proposed change
Nothing has occurred since, surely. TO
weaken the convictions OF the Christian
people in relation 10 the great evil Of
laxity in divorce.
Good Results Recognized.
ION the contrary. the admirable results
of the law Of 1901 limiting absolute di-
vorce Il speak not Of separation to a sin
gle cause have been, I think, generally
recognized. cannot, Of course, speak for
any church but my own at this time. but
I feel confident that the churches I have
mentioned. as well as others, will be
found opposed 70 this moral relapse which
is now suggested. do not know whether
the authorities Of the Roman Catholic
church will unite with their Protestant
brethren in active opposition, but no one
can for moment suppose that the rep
resentatives Of the Catholic church for "A
moment view with satisfaction a step so
caIamitous 70 the public morals and SO in-
furious TO the purity Of the home.
Threatens the Family.
statistics show that while the popula-
ton Of the United States, within a given
period, increased over 60 per cent, divorces
have Increased over $50 per cent. Indeed,
divorce has become so common. and is OBJ
tanned so often upon such frivolous
grounds, that the stability Of society and
the family Is threatened. The family is
the root Of society. and marriage is the
root of the family. The root OF the morals
Of every society is found in the morals Of
the family, and It's morals grow out OF the
ideals entertained about marriage.
IF there is any place in the United
States where high ideals Of marriage and
Of the family should be jeaiously main
tanned. surely it is in the Capital City.
which is. indeed, city upon a hill. and
whose influence goes out in every part Of
the country. The adoption of the law Of
1901 worked a great and beneficial change,
and the influence of the standard then set
has been. great for good not only here, but
throughout the United States.
Let us not abandon the high ground
upon which we now stand upon the pre-
text Of inducing States Ike Dakota to i'm
prove their code. To do so would be like
bartering our birthright for a mess of pot