The Washington times., 1917-03-29
ENGLISH DEMAND
DIVORCE EQUALITY
Poor People Seek as Right
What Heretofore Has Been
Luxury of Rich.

LONDON. March 2s.-Among the
marks Of the new democratic movement
in Great Britain one of the most in
teresting is the demand that divorce be
brought within the means OF the poor.
Nowadays it is the luxury OF the rich.
despite the fact that the law was anne
liorated a few years ago in a slight
measure.
Divorce. is granted on no frivolous
grounds in England. nor at any in
significant cost. A man can get an alb
soLute divorce II he can prove his wife
guilty Of unfaitIffu,ness. but the woman
doesn't even have that assured chance;
she must prove unfaithfulness and also
cruelty. "Incompatibility Of tempera-
ment" doesn't move a British Judge; he
would regard that plea as suggestive
Of desire to poke fun at his judicial
dignity and might make himself quite
disabreeable about it No more is deser-
tion ground for divorce.
II husband deserts his wife she may
&c to the local board OF guardians, who
deal with poor relief. and throw her
self on their mercy for support. II she
costs the guardians money then they
are indignant ABOUT II and will take
measure against the recreant husband
to compel him to perform the duty OF
supporting his wife. That is as far as
their concern or the laws concern goes
In such conjugal diyergences. Unless
the deserted spouse chooses to become
public charge no authority gets -ex-
cited about 1t.
Expense Held Ppohibitive.
A Judge who has dealt extensively
| with divorce and bigamy Eases de-
clares that the prohibitive expense OF
getting a divorce is responsible for
a great proportion of the bigamy
cases. The poor man may long since
have separated from his wife, and
both may be entirely agreeable TO
the arrangement. They would get a
divorce IL their means would permit.
After a time one of them wishes to
marry again, and. of course, cannot
do it. Then because of the desire to
| make the new relationship seen reg
ular ignorance leads to bigamy: the
ceremony seems to give a respect
ability, and the fact that II is an
absolute violation of the law Is either
! unrealized or ignored. The truth
comes to light, and there is a bigamy
prosecution.
The poor people in England have
| little use for the courts, because the
courts come too high. The instru-
mentalities of justice are not brought
to the poor man so intimately as In
America. II the poor man has Il
case he must take IT where the court
is, usually in London; he must take
his witnesses along and pay their ex-
penses. There is a procedure under
which the impecunious litigant may
have counsel provided for him, and
some other costs cared for, but he
must attend to the expenses of his
| witnesses, which commonly bars him
| from going TO court. Many years
ago a cynical English Judge remark
\ ed in a divorce case that justice was
even handed as between the rich and
| the poor-either the rich man or the
poor man could have a divorce n
| he had a good case and about G50O
for expenses! The only thing for the
poor man to do Is to keep out OF
court; and he does IT with a determi-
nation that is more devout than even
his adherence to the church.
Lawyer Gets "HIs.,
So lately as 1914 set of regUla-
tions relating to proceedings by and
against poor persons" were put into
effect They were expected greatly
| to increase the volume of litigation.
but they didn't. The poor person
with a good case under the employ
Gs' liability act didn't want to in
trust IL to a lawyer assigned by the
court; he hired his lawyer in the Ordi-
nary way on a contingent fee, and the
| lawyer got most of the money, as in
enlightened America. Expenses got
most OF the rest, ditto enlightened
America. Or the trade union to WHICH
he belonged had its own regular coun-
| sci that handled such cases This
has proved, for the people in position
to advantage themselves by IL. rather
the most efficacious way Of keeping
down the cost OF British justice.
At the last, then, the poor person
who really needs a courts attention
and has no chance OF getting it on a
4 contingent fee or through his union,
Is the one seeking a divorce. There
is nothing for him to do but pay the
I l. q