The Birmingham age-herald., 1922-03-19

Having presided over the equity division of the circuit court for five years, I have had the opportunity tc study our divorce laws and their ad- ministration.
 As to the divorce laws l offer nc criticism. To do so would merely bt to open avenues of endless debate which would accomplish little,
 Our machinery for administering divroce and Kindred laws, is entire ly obsolete. We are simply travelling the roaG our fathers have trod. These laws have remained practically un- changed for 70 years or more. And this notwithstanding the fact tha' our population has changed during this period from one practically rural to one very largely urban. They have remained unchanged, while dlVorces have been increasing in terrific vol ume. We have clung to the old, while many other cities have adopted meth. ods which meet the need of changed social conditions.
 Divorce Problem
 The first criticism is that the solu = ton of the divroce problem in thls county is turned over to a judge with his hands full of other most difficult Litigation. It is merely tackled onto the great system of equity jurispru' dence. There is certainly enough strictly equity jurisdiction In thlss county to consume the entire time of one judge.
 Memphis has two judges presiding over the chancery division. Atlanta, l have been told, has three. They have practically the same amount of such Litigation as Birmingham. The solu tion of the divorce problem IS a task worthy of the entire time or a most capable and highly trained fudge who is a specialist in such work.
 The method of trying divroce case now in force in our county and state is thoroughly antlquated. When a bill for divorce is filed by the husband or wife, the only thing that the court can do is to determine whether or not the party so applying is entitled to a decree of divorce.
 No Reconciliation
 Where a cross-bll is filed by the respondent party, the court can only determine which of the two. husband or wife, is at fault, and whether or not either is entitled to divorce. Thera is no power in the court for the judge 10 make any effort at reconciliation.
 1t matters not whether the testl- mony be taken before a commission CT or orally in open court the presen, method is to sit the husband on one side, the wife on the other. give each an opportunity, themselves, and by their witnesses. to say all of the harA things that they can, against the other.
 Few are so spotless in their pri- vate life as to be able to stand such public scrutiny. This results time and time again in creating breaches that can never be healed. If the par ties have acted inadvisedly in suing as they very frequently do, there Is no power in the court to do other than to find which of the two is al fault, or whether either is deserving of q decree.
 Case Is Triparti
 In this we think that the method Of administration of the law is en- 1irely out of keeping with the spirit of the divorce laws themselves. A divorce case is triparti: the husband being one party, the wife being the second party and the state being the third party; the state being made a party in order to preserve the family.
 Our present method of trial of the divorce case does not give the state the opportunity to preserve the social unit upon which our whole sys- tenn of government is buided
 The judge trying a divorce case should be provided with authority to endeavor to bring together the par