The silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1909-1925, 1922-03-07
SAYS DIVORCE LAW
IS TO Be CHANGED

Copies Of an initiative petition
having the object Of changing the
divorce residence from six months
to one year have been received in
different communities in the state,
including this city and, as an ex-
change aptly remarks the action
foreshadows some interesting d.
vorce problems for the people, the
state legislature and the courts.
To this may be added that many
residence property owners in west
state towns will also view the fu-
ture in more or less gloomy man.
ner with the divorce business, ad-
mittedly Nevada industry at the
present juncture, should this form
of business activity be denied them.
The petitions have been put for
ward by Bishop Hunting, of Reno,
and are designed to reenact the
one year divorce law of 1918 which
was effective from January, 1914,
until repealed in February, 1915,
after a trial Of thirteen months
duration. The present petition
must have the signatures Of 2498
persons or ten per cent of the total
vote for justices of the state su-
preme court in November, 1920,
and it must be filed with the sec
rotary of state not later than De-
cember, 1922, for presentation to
the legislature at the session be-
ginning January Is, 1923.
What the state legislature will
do with the petitions, if the required
number of names is obtained, is
a matter for conjecture. The re-
suit of the November election will
have considerable effect on the sit
nation.
At the November election there
Is a choice to be made between the
the initiative divorce measure of
1921 and the legislative substitute
measure Of the same year. Both
provide for six months residence
and both provide against the So
called short term residence under
the found in the county" clause,
and the only difference is that
the legislative substitute provides
for an interlocutory decree while
the initiative measure Of 1921 pro-
vides for an introductory decree in
the discretion of the court. In
view Of the fact that the latter
provision will give INSCRIPTIONS at
torneys a chance to extort large
fees from clients on the promise
of getting final decree through
an alleged pull" with the court,
It is probable that the people will
vote for the legislative substitute
which provides for a clean-cut final
decree.
The legislature not only proposed
this substitute which will 60 on
the ballot alongside the initiative
of 1921, but it passed law now
on the books and working on ex-
actly the same principle.
Suppose, remarks our exchange,
the legislative substitute is adopted
the same principle now observed
will be continued, but in that event
1t will probably be regarded as an
Initiative measure" which cannot
be annulled, set aside or repealed
by the legislature within three
years from the date said act takes
effect. The three year period will
date from the official declaration
Of the vote on December 18th, of
this year.
The question then arises that in
asmuch as the vote Of the people
will be committed to a six months
residence, wheter they choose be-
tween a final or an introductory
decree and that the law of the
people will be proof against legis-
lative annullment, setting aside, or
repeal during the period from De-
cember 18th, 1922, to December
18th, 1925, how any legislature
before the legislature of 1927 can
make change to one years res
idence is not understandable.
If the legislature of 1928 re-
fuses to act because forbidden, it
may be the people will have a
schance at It in the election Of 1924
but should it succeed there, the
change could not become effective
Mntl December, 1924.
It seems therefore, that Nevada
residents will 60 on with their six
months residence until that time OF
possibly until February, 1927.