The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1909-07-17
THE DIVORCE MILL.

Recently the supreme court of the state of Ne
vana took under consideration the question wheth-
er a libellant in a divorce suit not taking the
trouble to appear in court was entitled to a decree
and after gravely considering the question, said
such person was not. The Boston Post humor-
ously suggests that divorce by mail would be bad
form as result of this decision. That it is no
longer possible to "get divorce by maiP in Ne
vada is certainly encouraging 1t shows a little
more respect for the sanctlty of the marriage vow
than has heretofore obtained in that state, and en-
phaszes once more the urgent need of reform III the
divorce laws of the United States.
Granting for the sake of argument that it IS
neither desirable nor necessary to hold two per
sons who have been indiscreet in their selection
of partner in life to a hateful existence, and that
there are pardonable errors which should be for
given by judicial decree; laying aside the sacred
ness of the marriage VOW its inviolability. It's ho
ness it's divine character and considering marriage
simply as human institution, marriage de CON
venance" as the French say, the most obdur-
ate must grant that the attitude of the church
against divorce is preferable to the indscriminate
marriages and divorces which befoul the social
fabric at the very core If marriage is to be con-
sidered merely as a human institution, then
should the human institution be safeguarded by
more stringent laws; laws making it harder to
enter the marriage relation, and laws making
it still more difficult to have the bonds
severed. Further than this, those laws should De
uniform throughout the country. Regard for the
stability of society, for the life of the nation, and
for the perpetuation of civilization demands
more stringent regulation of marriage and divorce
than that which has obtained in several states. 1t
is an encouraging sign which comes from Ne
vada Divorces by mail have been discouraged by
the decision of the supreme court
Naturally the suggestion occurs that the ap
plication of this decision might be made to OPP
crate to the encouragement of the matrimonial
bureaus which flourish and grow strong by playing
upon the cupidity, inexperience and lust of those
seeking to enter the marriage relation and expect
to "win home through correspondence and the
exchange Of photographs.
Still considering the matter a human insti-
tuition the problem of law enactment and enforce
ment is a great one. Uniform state legislation
would remedy many of the evils, if the laws were
stringent enough to meet the demands of an
lightened public opinion. But it Is very improba-
bic that all the states would accept law drafted
by competent authorities on the subject. Those
states which refused to adopt such law in the
interest of uniformity and reform In the divorce
court procedure would no doubt become the homes
of those seeking separation, which would render
the efforts of other states of little avail. 1t is
probable that before the matter is settled the fed
eral government will enact a national law or the
subject.
The fact that there is one divorce to each
dozen marriages in the United States and that there
we're 945,625 divorces granted in the twenty years
from 1887 to 1906, both inclusive, should call
forth the most determined protest from those
who have the welfare of the country at heart,
if they do assert with grave heads that the atti
tude of the Catholic church is behind the times,
and not sufficient to meet the needs
IF humanity in this great and progressive TWEEN
tieth century.
In the meantime it would be pertinent to ask