The Logan Republican. [volume] (Logan, Utah) 1902-1924, 1921-10-27


Spreads Through EneIAnd.--ParIIs.
ment Takes Active Part In the Dls.
eusslon - Some 100000 splnsters
Must Emiurate to Find Mates.
Marriage and divorce are two topics
OF unusually lively debate in England
Just now, To discover the reason II Is
only necessary to go back to the war,
where many hasty marriages were
made and many others wrecked. The
war, which changed political bound.
aries and unsettled financial and eco
nomic conditions, gave the British so.
clnl system several nasty jolts, writes
Arthur S. Draper In the New York
Tribune.
In the first three months OF this
year there were 1887 weddings In
Great Britain. This number IL smaller
than the record for the last quarter
of last year. stu there are some
two million splnsters In these isles
who see little hope OF finding a mate
unless they emlgrate to New Zealand
Australia or Canada, where the male
" IN Jne majority
Parliament has been taking an nc.
tive part In the discussion Of marriage
and divorce. Two important measures
have been under discussion at various
times In the last year. One would
make divorce easier and the other
would protect the minor maiden. Mel.
tber has become n law. At first glance
II would seem there was only one side
to the questions, but actually they are
MS many sided as human nature itself
Play Arouses Protest.
There is play In London called "a
BIZ of enforcement" wherein won.
an is divorced from her lunatlc hus-
band, falls in love with another man
and then Is faced with the return Of
her husband, who has become sane.
This Is sO-called propaganda divorce
play, and incidentally II has aroused
many churchmen to protest. AproTsVs
says the Rev. Clarence May:
"When you talk about lunacy as u
ground for divorce, have you ever
thought of the cruelty to the ones left
behind In the lunatic asylum l have
been In many lunatic asylums, and
many of the inmates are as sane as
you and / are for five-sIxths of the
day. Often It happens that the one
thing man In an asylum is not mad
about Is the woman he loves--and that
Is the one comfort and consolation In
life left to him. If we are to divorce
for madness, why not for consumption
and cancerp So-cHlled easier divorce
Will never get rid of the hard cases.
Perhaps II a mans whole soul and
mind were mad, and nothing really re-
manned but his body, you would have
n case for divorce. But how are you
to tell when lunatic can never re-
cover, when patients are often released
from asylums after spending ten to
twenty years lnsIde?"
Incidentally, the discussion is fur
ther involved by the appearance of a
book written by a prominent English
doctor, In which he urges the consld.
Grafton Of euthanasia for the hopeless.
ly insane. He would place the lunatlc
husband or wife In lethal chamber
But the Ink is hardly dry In his book
before an equally prominent lawyer
offers violent opposition, asking peril
nently who Is to be the final Judge OF
those who are to be put to death, and
what standard is to be set.
The Rev. Basil G. BOurchler, vicar
Of the fashionable st. Jude-on-the-Hln
In the Hampstead Garden suburb, is a
cousin of the well-known actor Arthur
Bourchier, and no less dramatic
though he speaks from the pulpit. He
has been preaching a series OF Sun
day evening sermons on marriage and
divorce, and his large church has been
crowded to the doors. In frankness
he asks no odds Of Billy Sunday,
though he does not share the ex-base-
ball players views on the evils OF
alcoholic beverages. Says the vicar of
st. Jude's:
Make Marriage Harder.
should divorce be made easierY
Most certainly not. Instead OF making
this horrible thing more easy let us
work to make marriage harder. To
get married today Is far too easy and
simple. l am all for making marriage
on its legal side, purely civil or state
affair-as on the contlnent-the nup.
tial mass or benediction of the church
to follow in the case Of those who
really want and appreciate 1t. As II
Is today we clergy are hired hirellngs
OF the civil authority so far as mar
riages are concerned. Our position is
as false as II is undlgnified. II and
where and when an intended union
may be considered sacrilegIous, ours
ought TO be the right to refuse TO
solemnize such. AS things are we
possess no such right. II, therefore,
we are to continue to be state regis.
trars surely we should be entitled to
say upon what terms people should be
married according to the rites of the
Church Of England Infinitely better
though, to transfer the legallzlng Of
every marriage to the civil authority"