The Washington times., 1922-09-11
MRS. WOODROW
FAVORS EASIER
/. DIVORCE LAWS
Just Like Partnerships. She
Says--Long Engagements
No Surety Of Happiness.
nv MRS. WILSON WOODROW.


up sooner or later, especially now
when a clause forbidding the renar'
riake OF divorced persons is in the
program for the forthcoming conVen.
ton Of the Protestant Episcopal
Church.
Even il this were to become law
Of the church, it is doubtful II IT
would have much effect. 1t 10 sac
rifice of the Individual to the institu.
ton, and the individual has reached
q stage Of development where ne
questions the right of the institution
10 immediate him.
The opposition to divorce in TOTO,
and the opposition to the rema!riage
o. divorced persons, may be said 10
come from three classes--the happily
married. who believe that they nave
achieved their blessed state by reason
of their own patience. forbearlnce
end adaptability, and that II others
would practice the same virtues,
they, too, would reach Elysiurn; the
unhappily married, who have stuck
It out in the cage, and. because they
have suffered. object to any one else
trying to pursue happiness by break.
ing the bars and walking out; the
religionists, who believe that mar
riage is a sacrament and therefore
indIssoluble and inviolable.
Laws Are Divergent.
If the arguers, pro and con, would
only get together and give their time
and attention to securing humane
and enlightened uniform divorce
Rws in all the States in the Union,
II would seem to the average lay
man a more sane and constructive
use of their power.
Every State regards marriage as
n contract, but the laws governing
that contract are divergent and lead
to many unpleasant complications.
The divorce law in New YORK
State. for instance, which admits
only one cause, and that adultery, is
In it's application rather vicious
farce, Every one knows how the
cast is engaged, the stage set ana
the evidence presented.
But the arguers apparently prefer
to talk. The good old phrases are
certainly working overtime:
THE menace of divorce 'the
increasing frequency Of divorce"
divorce as a growing danger 10
family life" One of the favorites Is.
divorce would be Curbed II mar
rage were less lightly entered into.
IL SOUNDS impressive, DuN IL NV
phrase lovers would only rely less
on theory and more on their obser-
walton OF life as 1t Is lived, their
utterances might be less glib.
Conventions Vary.
Whether one has Travelled the
world over or never moved from
his native village. he has observed
certain variations in the accepted
conventions regarding marriage:
We have all known the boy ana
girl sweethearts who grew UP IN
the same community. with every
opportunity to learn the peculiari'
ties of each others temperaments
Ultimately they marry, to the
strains of the wedding march ana
the happy predictions of friends.
A wear or two, and-Crash! The
marriage blows up.
All of us have also seen the
ten-year engagement. where the
faithful but sligf tly shopworn par
ticipants adhere riEidly to each
others society. A gasp OF relief
goes up. Her mother has finally
died. and has a good position.
They really are going to be mar
ried at last. Isn't 1t lovely? Wed
ding bells. Then awed whispers.
A divorce.
On the other hand. we have all
encountered that perfectly reck-
less couple who met for the first
time in the home Of mutual friends
and were married within the week.
Appalling! So unconsidered! Neither
knows anything about the others
family or friends. There isn't
chance in the world for them.
Later. we find ourselves in the
unenviable position OF false pro
phets. The marriage is ideal; one
Of those affairs you read about.
There we are confronted with
facts, the facts which keep fresh
and green that old saying that mar.
riage is a lottery.
Shrink From Divorce.
The opponents OF divorce always
speak as II man or woman con-
templating 1t rushed toward the
freedom it Offered with dancing
steps. Again observation bellies
them. There are no persons on the
brink of divorce whom ] have ever
known, and I assume that my eX.
perience Is general, who did not
shrink from the idea and regard it
with instructive repugnance. 1t was
certainly preferable to the ills they
were bearing. but that was about all
that could be said for 1t. 1t re.
ntRined an ordeal.
The reason for this is manifold.
In the first place, It is wounding to
the vanity. for, looked at from any
aspect. it is a confession of failure.
This may be to their credit or dis
credit, but that is immaterial; the
world sees nothing but results. In
the eyes of the world, then, they
undertook a life job-couldn make
It go, and threw II up. This Is al
ways a humiliatinG confession TO
make, either privately or publicly.
Even while woman Is telling you
what brute and disgusting
drunkard he was, she is moro or
less self.apologetic, putting forth
her excuses, because for some
reason she feels It necessary TO
make them. And she is always
particularly careful to tell you that
it was she who divorced her hus.
band, and not he her.
Social Stakes Differ.
And the man who says: She
was a charming woman, but well,
we simply didn't hit II off, and that
was all there was to IT," is always