Evening star., 1922-01-28
LAWS FAULTY, SAYS.
ALEXANDRIA JUDGE
Blamed for Divorce Evil by
MISUNDERSTANDING Is
Recommended.
By a STAFF Correspondent.


ALEXANDRIA, Va, January 2S.-
Judge Robinson Moncure, who pre-
sides over the court here where all
divorce cases are handled, is Of the
opinion that the divorce law of Vir-
ginia is faulty and should be reme-
died. He made this statement to The
Stars representative today when
asked for an expression regarding di-
vorce evils existing in this CITY,.
While not caring to venture an
opinion as to the existence of an evil
regarding divorces other than to say
that In his opinion the law was not
no Irregularities being practiced by
attorneys. he said the divorce law
should be clarified and that the law
should be more restrictive and more
definite. In his opinion safeguards
should be afforded the interests of
the detendants and the interests of
the state.
Would Reduce Divorce Grounds,
When asked for a more specific
expression Judge Moncure stated
that he believes that the law should
be such as to reduce the grounds for
divorce to the least possible number
and for such causes as appeal to the
conscience of good substantial citi-
zens. He is of the opinion that the
law should be more specific and def
mite as to what constitutes the nec-
essary domocile, and as for affording
safeguards, he contends that the
statutes should require a longer
period OF residence within the state
than the one year now required un-
der the law. A longer period of resi-
dence in the state would, he said. be
evidence of the good faith on the
part of the applicants for divorce
and would tend to indicate that he
or she intended making Virginia his
permanent home.
AS an additional safeguard, Judge
Moncure would amend the law SO as
to require each attorney fling a
divorce suit to accompany the appli-
that he had personally Investigated
the question Of residence on the part
Of the plaintiff and was convinced
that the law had been complied with
in every particular. 1nasmuch as
there are so many divorce cases un-
Qutre the court to appoint, at the ex-
pense Of the plaintiff, some reputable
attorney to represent the interests of
the State. 1t should be the duty of
such attorney, when designated by the
court, to file an answer to all appli-
cations and to appear at the taking
Of depositions and the cross-examine
witnesses.
Ancient Practice Followed.
"If the law is being abused here"
Judge Moncure stated. ut is through
the inability on the part of the court
to determine the. truthfulness Of the
applicant, regarding his or her resi-
ience In the state. In Virginia the
old.ti chancery practices, used in
England hundreds Of years ago, Is still
followed in connection with divorces
For instance, the evidence Is taken
before some minor official Of the court
and the cases come before the court
in the form Of dispositions except In
cases where open hearings are re-
quested.
"When depositions are made the
Judge does not see the witnesses and
is unable to pass judgment upon their
demear1or on the stand, consequently
on record that Is complete, and
where, on its face, 1t Is evident that
tho plaintiff is entitled under the law
to equitable relief, the judge has little
Or no other discretion In the matter
other than to sign the decree. In the
event tho Judge should. refuse to sign
Continued on Page Z. Column - -