The Washington times., 1912-06-27
Why Not Help Further the Lead Of
the District Bar to Revise the
Present Divorce Lawsf

~ tne DultoT o. THE ItmES:
Tho Bar Association of the District
has gone upon record favoring a change
In the divorce law Of this Jurisdiction.
The claim is that the present law is in
adequate TO meet the needs and do JUS
tice. The attorneys recommend some
Vital changes. which appear logical as
well as needed.
IL seems to me that their action in
this matter ought to be welcomed with
open minded candor by all citizens. The
oar 10 the most conservative class Of
professional citizens in the body polite,
SO that when an association Of attor-
neys, deliberately urge any change in
legislation 1t Is beyond dispute, almost,
that there must be some serious need
FOR the suggested changes.
The associations recommendation
does not seek to make conditions less
divorce easy" but four causes are
named, instead of one, as the law now
is, and each one Of these four Is serious
enough 1t seems to me that any fair
that any one OF the causes is fully as
serious, and as criminal, as any other.
II any one OF these causes be true the
marriage is failure. Love Is gone, self
respect outraged, home robbed OF its
peace and the union Of two hearts IA
tally disrupted. The mission of the law
10 to provide relief, to do simple justice,
30 far as possible.
There are those who do not believe in
divorce at all, for any cause. Such peo-
pie would be severely consistent at the
expense OF being unpardonably cruel
| and unjust, Those who oppose all di-
vorce usually change their "belier'
when actual experience in marital mis-
cry wrecks home OF their own max
| Ing; Suffering wrongs awakens SYM
pathy for our fellows, fated to endure
similar or more serious wrongs.
The present law of the. District pro-
eause: Namely, infdelity, or adultery
| But for most part infidelity does not
| work any more evil, nor destroy home
ties any more surely. than crimes ot
willful and continuous desertion anc
their Inevitably attendant miseries.
| 1t is charged that the clergy Of the
| District are mainly responsible for the
ago. I am disposed to doubt tha'
charges trtuhfulness. Ministers as &
| class are too benevolent minded, too
sympathetic. TO do any injustice know
irgly. Ministers would hardly advocat,
laws that would be partial and unjust
| and the present divorce law OF the Dis
trfct Is most unfair and unjust. in tina
IT provides relief in one class Of case
and denies relief and justice in othe
cases, different in class and character
but in which the parties are equal.
outraged and fully as helpless. It seem
to me that the ministers OF this cit!
should indorse the recommended tons O
the Bar Association and use their infu
ence to change the law. that II be NOR
= humane. equitable. and impa rtial.
One paper of this city has insinuate
that the attorneys have mercenary mo
tives In this action. 1t would give ther
more business II Is charged! I conside
that charge very unfair, even slander
GUS. Why not, with equal plausibility
accuse the ministers with improper mo
tves for urging the making OF the pres
ent law?
The fact Is the attorneys come I
know the bitter facts about marital dis
sensions and divisions as the genera
public do not know. and as the minister
, DO not know. The distracted, deserted
wronged. and maltreated come to tn
attorneys, seeking for justice. The
have cause sufficient enough to NOV
the pity OF a savage. sometimes, bu
the limited law denies them relief; so
despair a worse condition succeeds an
not infrequently more serious crtmina
, itv results
Those who live in ease and in con
parative happiness do not know, the
cannot know. the extent Of their mis-
cry as attorneys learn of It. Have yo
no sympathy for unfortunates becaus
you may not now be unfortunate? Hay
you really given this subject any ser
icus unselfish consideration?
YELEEK SFMAJ