The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-02-05
INDUSTRIOUS BILL
IS ACT Of JUSTICE
Nothing Resembling Flasler Law
Was Ever In
tended.
--------------s
M ( NJ 3 Frs ARE INDIGNANT
---------------
Divorce Matter Has Been Tlresh-
cd Out Again and
Again.
M ( M 0 Frs ARE INDIGNANT

Amusement, tempered with not n
small feeling OF anger at the implied
reflection upon them was felt by the
members of tile Senate and OF the
House Committee for Courts of Justice
Yesterday afternoon, when somebody
discovered mares nest in the bin
now pending in the House which will
amend the laws as TO divorces. It
was made to appear that the bill
throws open. tho oars to any man Ia
get divorce by deserving his wife;
and that 1t Is similar In every re-
Florida
u is furthermore made to appear
that the. measure passed the senate
without inspection. and THAI the mig
ger in the woodpile has Just been dis
covered in tho House.
Everybody knew II.
AS n matter of fact. Senate bin No.
81 does not contemplate any such
thing. The possibility pointed out was
fully threshed out and discussed In
both the Senate and House Committees
for Courts of Justice: 1t was argued
on tn. floor of the House several days
ago by Mr.. Cooke, and II has been a
matter of the commonest sort of talk
in the House for at least a week
where it is being opposed by some wen
meaning members.
While those Senators and those mem
bers of the House committee who en-
joy a Joke We're somewhat amused
there was nothing but the most earn
est Indignation on the part of the at
torney who is before the Legislature
In the interest of the bill. and who Is
thus charged with lobbying. for some
thing akin to tho Flagler bin. which
a fas as %h,Gh does sao n 3 In the "H eas
enter into the present measure. ana
has never for an instant been content
plated
. The committeeman say there Is not
NJ, tt,t l,a st.t ~ IA
IF the bill passes the House and is
signed by the Governor 1t will only be
necessary for II husband to leave his
wife and declare to her that he viii
not return in order that he may get
divorce ut the end of three years" AS
far from the fact Is it that ''at the
expiration OF three years the husband
may petition the court for an absolute
divorce, and there will be nothing to
prevent his getting it,
TNrcts of Matter.
The following clear statement OF tie
case was made last night by two mem
hers of the House Committee for Courts
OF Justice, who stand by the allega-
tons therein:
The law. of Virginia as it now
from bed and board--that is, a legal
aeparaton--has been granted to either
party, the injured party may, after tho
lapse of three years, the separation
having continued, apply to the court
which granted the divorce and ask
That the divorce from bed and board
be merged into divorce from the
bonds of matrimony. II viii be OBJ
served that the law as it now stands
leaves II wholly III the hands of the
so-called injured party 10 control the
future destiny of the other party. In
other words, under the present law,
a man may secure II divorce from bed
and board from his wife for deser-
ton. and at the end of three years
n nn1 eel
that the decree for divorce from bed
and board be merged into an absolute
divorce, while the woman could not
even apply to the court for a hearing.
OF the man He, on the other hand,
might say: I Will not 1.-Two with You;
] snail have nothing further I'd do with
YOU; / shall not file application with
decree. and under the law you cannot
OF course, this is equally true in
case In which the woman had sued the
man for divorce from bed and board.
Would Lcnyc II to Court
The purpose of the amendment pro-
Nidcd for by Senate bill No. As is not
TO create other grounds for divorce or
10 give either party an absolute ground
Tor q divorce but Is simply intended
TO take the matter out of the hands of
either the man Or the woman. neither
OF Whom, by. reason of their disagree
ment, would re .cc,hpetent 10 judge OF
W lla NptEu De 10 INe best interest o { !
themselves or of society and to place |
the question exclusively in the hands |
of court Of equity. to be dealt with
BY the Judge OF such court under the |
law OF, the land as it now stands. Is il !
possible that the people of Virginia |
cannot trust their own courts to deal |
justly with litisants and to preserve |
the dignity of the State?
AS an illustration Of what may hap. !
pen, and what is known to have hap |
pehed III more than one instance in |
Virginia under the present law, let rs |,
suppose man and woman to have |
been married TO have had one child, a |
little daughter Later the man dis !
covers that his wife is impure and un-
true to him. lie declines TO further |
i've with her but out of consideration
Tor his Httle one he is unwilling to
publicly brand the mother as an adul- |
teress.
He takes his child aud leaves. Els
wife sues him for a divorce from bed
than make known her fault to the
world, makes no answer but submits
70 the entering of the decree and to
the giving of alimony out of his estate
to his wife. The record would show
that the Wife in this case was the IN
cured party, whereas, as matter OF
fact, the man would be the injured
party, having submitted to appear in
false position rather than bring in
fanny upon lis child. and yet, under
the law, as 1T now stands. while the
woman at the end of three years might
apply TO the court and ask that the
divorce from bed and board might
be made q divorce from the bonds OF