The Washington times., 1923-11-28
By Charles G.. Norris.

w eSS~A%Os JO0 4A@AESAJ
that divorce destroys
marriage. 1t doesn't;
It distinctly fosters 1t. A thou
sand divorces mean two thou.
sand marriages. Divorce resorts
the couples, which I main
tain. Is a very good thing, when
they are ill-assorted. Moreover,
& makes timid people who are
afraid Of marriage more willing
to try It. And don't you think
that just because divorce is pos
aible. it acts as a preventive to
itself?"
The clergyman eyed Philip in
tolerant reproach, but before he
could answer, Rosemary spoke.
Harry and I have had one Of
the most perfect marriages of
the world, but sometimes I think,
Mr.. Gould. it's because both of us
have been so desperately inter-
ested in making our home a
succtss."
"That's exactly what marriage
should mean-always." The clergy
man turned to Philip: There's
your answer: TO make the home
Q success!
''But it doesn't do that! Mar
riage is slavery, nine times out or
Tents life sentence to unhap-
piness. How in the name Of all
that's fair and just, are a man
and woman to know whether or
not they are congenial? How are
they to know whether or not they
have the same taste in regard
to clothes, books. food, music,
flowers. friends, children? How
are they to know whether they
are mates or mismates in their
sex relationship? It's a
fearful gamble. for which you
have to pay dearly If you lose"
''I'E be fair to you, Philip.
You're right about marriage being
somewhat OF a leap in the dark.
We do our best to help young
men and women to become well
acquainted with one another be-
fore they marry. That's the par
ents' duty; everyone's duty.
That's all that can be done.
Anything further would be un-
thinIable Trial marriages are
intolerable, UNI Christian. imprac-
ticabIe. We should arrive exactly
where we are today. Marriages
frequently turn out unfortunately.
and there are many instances
when a heavy penalty is imposed
In such cases, I say, let husband
and wife separation only a
lime. maybe-for life If necessary.
But let them remarry? No.
There should be positive law
forbidding remarriage under any
circumstances. Such a place as
Reno is a dissertation Of our ma
tional life. I refuse positively to
marry anyone who has living
husband or wife, and every cler-
gyman, no matter Of what faith,
should make that his Christian
duty. The Roman Catholic
Church stands firm upon that
Issue and"
Mr.. Could" Rosemary inter-
rupted, there's many a Roman
Catholic marriage that's been dis
solved by the Pope for good and
sufficient reasons and the par.
ties have remarked"
The Forecast
THAT may be, but it should
not be allowed. The Episcopal
Church. believe, at it's next gen.
eral convention. will adopt canon
making remarriage impossible,
and all other Christian churches
win follow suit. Divorce and re-
marriage is the most pressing
question before the nation to-
day"
Padre" said Philip earnestly,
you can never take the right of
people to remarry away from
them-not in this country. We
are a democracy and our Con-
: stitution specifies liberty and the
pursuit Of happiness for all. To
force two unmarried people who
did not like each other 10 marry
would be certainly an outrageous
injustice. But it is exactly the
same thing to force people to stay
married when they no longer