The Washington times., 1927-12-02
NEED.
MARITAL AID
BY F. A. WRAY
international News Service

GGEBlSG
LONDON. Dec. 2.-Altheugh the
increase Of divorce in Great Britain
has been tremendous in the past
decade. il is not a question Of NOR.
atty or OF laws banning publicity on
divorce court evidence. according to
Mrs. NJ. l.. Seaten.T Lehman, eecre-
tary Of the Divorce Law Reform
Union.
Divorce increase in Great Britain
Is due to broadening Of the divorce
laws, and the further broadening Of
these laws is necessary, Mrs. Seaten-
Tiedman declares.
Suppression of evidence has had
only a slight effect on divorces OBJ
tained," says Mrs. Seaton- Tiedman.
Names of the parties. the nature
OF the offense, and various other
facts are still printed in newspapers.
Moreover. several of the judges are
so convinced that publicity is needed
that. in their judgments. they state
the facts in such way as to place
them fully before the public.
Favor Publicity
I'VE are all for publicity. The
present tendency to an increase in
divorce is not due to any question
Of morality or immortality. There Is
no such thing az pre.war or postwar
immortality. The important point to-
day Is that publicity has brought all
these matters into the light of day,
and discussion. Only the extreme
clerical party opposed publicity.
1.-The new act of 1923, which gave
both parties a right to divorce on
the ground Of misconduct alone, is
certainly responsible to some extent
for the increase in cases, but not
to the extent generally thought.
Before that act, women had to
prove not only misconduct on the
part of the husband, but either
cruelty or desertion as we'll So far
women have this disability removed
and men also are able to lay
themselves open to q charge Of
misconduct without being also
pilloried for cruelty-the numbers
have gone up.
But the figures for divorce win
swell when some of the worse evils
that can attend marriages are made
causes Of divorce. Misconduct may,
at times. be forgiven or overlooked,
but there are other things which
may make marriage a hell.
THE chief point Is that Of de-
sertion alone. There are thousands
of cases in Britain where husband
or wife have been deserted for
many years. They may know where
the other party is living. and under
what conditions. but the bond IL
indissoluahle. The law allows only
separation.
Then one party may be married
tn an incurahle lunatic; or may SUI.
fer incessans and horrible cruelty:
or may be tied to q hopeless drunk.
ard; or to a criminal serving q life
sentence-and yet in none of these
cases does the British law give the
innocent sufferer freedom by divorce.
And where separation is granted,
there Is no right of remarriage, al
though, in principle 1t frequently
leads to bigamy.
What we advocate il q system
Of Domestic Court" to consider
marriage and divorce in ali aspects.
We want these courts to be free
from legal shaclles and to look At
the matter from q different view.
point entirely.
There is undoubtedly a growing
public demand in Britain for all that
Mrs. eaton-Tiedman demands. &c.
cleistical opposition is, however. still
very strong and powerful. But all
signs point to a considerable in.
crease both in the number of. and
facilities for, divorce in the next 10
years. ~,