New-York tribune., 1910-07-31
DO Our Courts Stimulate Di4,orce
BY Aswardin6 Too Big AHmonY :?

All encoura cement 10 the mercenary 10 seek
divorce is it?''
Il shouldn't think So And anyway, /
suppose Mrs. Gould's $4,000 a year couldn't
serve as g. case in point to the woman
whose husband gets from 10 TO $40 a week.
R.ca people form only a small percentage
O. the divorced, anyway. BY the way, what
IS the usual aiimony a. man has 10 pay VINO
earns frCal ;z5 10 $50 a week.
probably fTon-SS to So Then he ADDED:
You realize. don't you. that only the wife
who is Without error receives alimony at
alp
Yes. I understand That" / said. DO the
courts make the tax on the wealthy more
onerous than on the salaried MANI
Il think not You will seldom find the
courts awarding more than 2 third or a
fourth of a mans income. OF course The
number of children is necessarily taken
into account
"s@V-nat you've told me puts rather q
different light on things" I said, thought
fully Probably any woman who was get
ting q divorce for the sake OF alimony
would start her Inquiries at that end, and
under those circumstances desist, shouldn I
you think
There is something TO be said for that
point OF view. Moreover. another thing the
eminent jurist apparently has not thought
OF occurs 10 me- II it be true that & re-
ouced aiimony schedule would discourage
wives from seeking their freedom, wouldn't
il also tend to encourage discontented hus-
hands TO seek theirs?'
That's So ! hadn't thought Of that.
"A reduced aiimony would certainly De
much less expensive than matrimony.
HIN, that's true. too. But wasn't there
a law under which a divorced wife could
have her cake and eat it, too
Meaning the one which permitted her TO
marry again and still collect alimony from
her former husband2"
Veg"
And that wasn't all OF it, either II she
was really an enterprising woman and
made her selections carefully, she could
divorce four Or five and collect alimony
from all Of them. until she had finally ac-
uuired sufficient income TO retire actively
from business
My goodness" l exclaimed. Not
realiy?"
Mr. LIE Barber laughed. Yes he said,
but that law was SO much abused that it
was repealed. Now a wife's remarrlage
stops her alimony"
"Always?"
''Always-in this state.
Now, suppose a woman To whom was
awarded SO a week alimony went to work
and earned an additional SIS, would the ali
mony he taken away from herr"
"A woman awarded SIS a week alimony
and earning that same amount would prob
ably excite envy In the eyes Of her ex-
husband. whose earnings under these cir
cumstsnces might Dc less. Sweyed by this
consideration, he might move FOR reduo-
ton, provided the decree permitted suoh a
motion The court however. is pretty
shTcwd rule. and sizes up accurat tclY
u1iscreants OF this kind. 1t also takes into
consideration that the woman may lose hee
Job. So that. generally speaking. the eI-
husband has his n oub.e for his pains Any
thing else you want TO knoW7"
Yes. Can alimony awarded In one state
be collected in another"
Yes, tnat isl
I mentioned the nauss OF d we'll known
actor who had been kept out of New York
for years because OF unpaid aiimony.
What about hfm7' asked
II was about TO state--
When I interrupted YOU"
That IL you Rre awarded alimony in
this state and your husband went 70
Massachusetss TO evade payment. you could
60 TO Massachusetts, begin suit there upon
0e nftsn,sr. -rt1ylpS AZ evfdanco the