The news-democrat. (Providence, R.I.) 1906-1909, 1907-01-11

When Elsie Clews Parsons, i'm her book
on ''The Family" suggested that mar
riages should be contracted on proba tlon
her only motive, undoubtedly, was the
charitable one OF pity for the mismated
couple. But seldom has well-meant pro-
posal been hailed with so unanimous n
shout OF disapproval. ON every hand the
pulpit thundered its condemnation. Bishop
Satterlee, OF Washington. Is reported as
saying:
Such an adjustment would mean the alb
solute breaking OF marriage ties. the de-
gradation OF woman. | cannot conceive OF
the acquicscence OF any one in such a
proposition
Bishop Fallows Of Chicago says:
Trial marriage would never do In tho
first place IL would contravene the divine
law OF monogamy In the second place IL
would make the status OF children most
unsatisfactory and cause endless confu-
sion In the third place IL would open the.
way TO license. Trial marriage would be
productive OF imporality. II would break
up the home, the very foundation OF So
ciety. IL would disrupt the social fabric
and lead 10 fearful consequences.
Or. Morgan Dix, the rector OF Trinity
church, New York, said: Few persons
know, and very few reflect. 10 what an
extreme the radicals OF the day are push
ing their schemes OF social revolution.
When so much Is bad, IL is hard TO say
what is the worst: but perhaps the
worst is the plan TO abolish marriage and
break up the home. II is in the mind OF
these fanatics that marriage shall cease;
that men aud women shall mate at pleas
urc, and that tho children resulting from
these temporary unions shall belong. not
90 the animals which produce them. but
TO the state. which must have citizens,
and own them like other kinds OF proper
ty. and use them for It's purposes.
This odious scheme is seriously present
cd IN books OF wide circulation and hs
advocates. I'm trying 20 make converts IN
places frequented by the scditlous com
munlsts and the murderous anarchists,
are not interfered with by the police.
After reading such ecclesiastical ansthe-
mas. an examination OF Mrs. Parsons
book Is more or less surprising. The
Family" does not seem 10 be revou-
uonary or incendlary. IL contains a series
OF lectures reviewing domestic customs
and conditions prevalent among various
people both civilized and uncivllized The
writer's statements are couched I'm n tone
Of academic calm. and buttressed by notes
containing careful compilation Of his
torcal and sociological data They inform
us. for instance that among the Point
Barrow Eskimo it Is mo unusual sight 20
see little girl OF 10 or II carrying "A we'll
grown. heavy child on her back instead
OF It's mothcr'-a sentence which might
fairly be criticised for its ambiguous con-
struction. but which does not appear to
be otherwise Objectionable. or again. we
learn from The Family" that etiquette
among the Central Australians demands
that when father-in-law dies. the SON
in-law must cut his shoulders with
knife as a mark OF sorrow; together with
a large variety uf equally interesting. but
no moro demorallzlng. information
All tho hubhuh seems TO have been
aroused ny siN-linc sentence 81 the lasi
lecture 81 the book. After pointing tho
evils that too often result from our exist
ing sco.sl system can anyone question