The sun., 1919-02-25
DIVORCES.
Evidence That Increasing Wealth I
Not a Cause Of Their Increase.


To THE EDITOR o TIE SuN--Sir: Re-
ferring to the editorial article on "Di-
vorce as a Measure of Prosperity and
Education" after an experience of many
years at the Reno bar. both before and
l,rfter the New York lawyers discovered
the Nevada divorce law. and after a
somewhat extended study OF the divorce
problem, the writer differs from the
Judge quoted In the article as saying
that ''the increasing wealth of the peo-
pie" Is responsible for the growth OF
divorce. but agrees with him that their
education is p large factor,
Very few OF the Reno applicants or
"colonis:s'' are people OF wealth an1 a
large majority are Of the working
classes. A visit % the Me- York di-
vorce courts (Supreme Court. Special
Term. Part I'D on any FRIDAY Viii
show the same conditions. That wealth
Ia not responsible is further evidenced
by the Government statistics wherein
bankers are ranked twentieth in pro-
portion to number Actors are first,
commercial travellers second. musicians
third. &c.
The same statistics also show that
there was no perceptiblc dimlrution in
the panic years 1873 and 1898. No ac-
curate statistics for 1907 are yet avail
able.
Two-thirds OF all divorces in the
United States are granted to women.
and their education is the cause-par
ticularly that education which has
equipped them to take advantage Of the
new avenues OF employment that the
telephone. typewriter and other modern
inventions have opened UP. These have
given women an economic independence
and divorce seems to have kept pace
with the growth thereof.
Japan allows divorce by mutual con-
sent and ss.7 per cent. OF all divorces
In that country take that simple method
and avoid the courts. Notwithstanding
that easy and cheap procedure. the di-
vorce rate in Japan decreased from 2s3
per 100000 population In 1887 to $40
in 1903.
Restrictive legislation has accom-
plished no permanent results. Call
inrnia established her one year inter
locutory decree in 1903 with the result
that divorce decreased about 90 per
cent. In 1904. only to be back at the
old rate in 1907 and 10 increase 80 per
cent. (over the ratio for 1902 In 1912
In 1905 Wisconsin passed a similar law
without any appreciable effect
Restrictions on remarriage after d.
vorce are useless because parties ev1ds
them by going to adjacent States Such
restrictions have no extraterritoriai ef-
feet A marriage legal in the place
where contracted Is legal everywhere.
Divorce is simply legal sanction for
what the parties have already done for
themselves. They are effectuslly di-
vorced In fact before they appeal to the
courts.
Only about 500 divorces are granted
in Nevada every year which is a mere
bagatelle as compared with the more
than 100000 granted annually in the
other States OF the Union.
While there should be a uniform d.
vorce law, which can only be had by
change of the Constitution and an act
OF Congress, II Is unlikely that this gem
Grafton or the next will see It. In the
meantime while we have forty-eIght
States. each with laws OF its own, any
citizen should have the freeborn Ameri-
can right TO move from one State TO
another at will for any reason that may
seem sufficient TO him or TO her.
OSCAR J. SMITH.
NEW YORK. February "a.