Tonopah daily bonanza. [volume] (Tonopah, Nev.) 1906-1929, 1910-12-14
NEVADA DIVORCE
CONSTRUED by A
CARSON LAWYER
ALFRED CHARTZ GIVES VIEWS
On SUBJECT OF GENERAL
INTEREST

AS | read and construe the law,
it is utterly impossible for persons
married in the state of New York
to obtain a legal divorce, free of
cncumbrances, in the state of Ne
vada, or in any other state in the
union, than within the state of
New York itself-unless the parties
TO the action appear in court and
n good faith contest the same. AS
further construe the law, such
divorces are good everywhere, eX-
sept in the state of New York, and
children born of remarriages after
such divorces are legitimate every
where except in the state of New
York and the moment they step
within the boundaries of the state
of New York they are bastards, and
| their property rights are limited to
| the rights of bastards to all prop
| erty situate within that state, and
| their parents who step within the
boundaries Immediately become big
amists, and subject to prosecution
for that crime, although should
they keep within one foot of the
boundary line they would remain
within the pale of the law, and be
considered decently married hus-
band and wife, their children con-
isdered perfectly legitimate. Thus,
under the peculiar laws of the sew
eral states of the union, we find a
boy or girl bastard in New York
and legitimate everywhere else in
the world, and we find man or
woman guilty of bigamy in New
York innocent everywhere else.
The foregoing statement of facts,
if correctly stated, calls for radical
Legislation. | suggest that congress
should take the first step, and that
every state in the union should fol-
low in it's steps, to the end that we
would thus obtain uniform laws,
and establish uniform rights. I
cannot in short article suggest all
the rights and wrongs suggested to
my mind, and herein simply at
tempt to. suggest plan.
AS. matter of illustration, it
may be proper to recall the divorce
case of William E. Corey, president
of the United States Trust company
He induced his wife to obtain di.
vorce from him at Reno. She filed
her complaint, resided at Reno and
all around for six months. She
twas constantly attended by lawyers
employed and paid for by her hus-
band, and by other attendants to
see that she did not "welch"' OIL
"renig" He employed and paid fol
d her attorneys, and employed anG
r paid for his own She was con
2 stantly under surveillance by hi!
!. employees. She did not WEIGH" bu
!, testified as instructed, and she 60
e her divorce as he wanted it. HI
= did not appear, but his attorney
# asked only such questions as woult
2 help the plaintiff to obtain the di
i vorce that he wanted.
el | cannot conceive, under the evi
= dence, that there remained a singh
e badge of collusive fraud that coul,
J be perpetrated upon the court, an,
- that every fraud that could be per
n petrated upon the court was perpe
- trated, and under the law as l con
lie strue it, the decree of divorce a
re therein granted is absolutely nu
n and void, and can be set aside, an
upon it's being set aside the frs
wife and her property rights mus
be restored as though no divorc
= had ever been granted.
We thus find William Ellis Ct
: rey a bigamist in New York wheI
ever he steps within its boundarie
:. and with but one wife the mome1
he steps out of it's boundaries, lea
ing him the balance of the worl
for freedom.
However, any property he ms
leave on his death situate with
the jurisdiction of the state of Ne
York will remain subject to Il
rights of his first wife. and her hei
he just as though she was his on
relict.