Year: 1869

oaOal0 NAA4 A@S8~ - - ~ A~~SaAAy Va


change the divorce law of the Terri.


tory. As the statute now stands, too


much latitude is given to the Judges,
and the result has been to encourage


separations, than which nothing can


be more subversive of good morals.


We believe that substantially our


statute is copied from the law Of In


diana on this subject, and all know


what OblOquy and reproach has been


brought on the Hoosier State by the


facility with which divorces are grant


ed to all corners. Any person who


will take the pains to refer to the


law, will fnd'that the District Judges


are authorized to grant divorces for


almost every imaginable reason, aud


then for fear that the specifications


are not sufficiently full, it is added,


"Or for any other cause that the


Judge may deem sufficient" The


whole marriage relation is thus left


at the mercy of the Judge, who may
separate man and wife for any cause,


or no cause, if so disposed. We do


not charge that this provision of the


law has been abused, but with this
chart placed in their hands by the
law making power of the Territory,
it is not strange that the Judges have
felt invited to use their power with
great freedom, and that divorces have
multiplied in number until they oc


cupy the attention of the Courts to


the exclusion of other and more legit-
innate business. The law, in our
opinion, should be modified so as to
restrict the granting of divorces to
the scriptual causes, habitual drunk
euness, and systematic cruelty-the
offending or guilty party in all cases
to be declared incapable of contract
ing a second marriage. With some
such a law as this on our statute
book, divorces would become less
common, and the family tie would
come to be regarded as an indissolu-
Bile link. Another provision in the
law, without doubt, has tended to en-
courage these frequent separations.
We refer to the authority given to
the Judge to dispose of the property
of the husband, with scarce any re
striction whatever. The effect of
this is to hold out inducements to the
weak.minded wife to leave her hus-
band and thereby come into the pos
session of his property 1t has been
charged that in some instances mar
risges have been contracted for no
other purpose than to lay the basis
for future divorce suit in which the
victimized husband is to be stripped
of his wealth. The law should
never hold out a premium for the
commission of wrong, and in this re>
spect it should be amended. In case
Of death, the widow only takes one,
third the real property OF the hus>
band, and where the wife is widow
ed by decree of a court, and pos
siby is just waiting for that decree
to enable her to consummate another
matrimonial arrangement, we can
see neither right nor justice 10
awarding her-as the Judge has au-
thority to do-the whole of the prop
erty belonging to the husband whose
home she has abandoned. The widow
who mourns for her dead husband
gets but one>third of his real proper
ty, and we know of no reason in JUS
tice or equity why the woman who
is widowed by decree of the Court
should fare better. The marriage re.
latiou lies a the bottom of organized
society, and instead of loosening its
ties it should be the object of legis
latiOn 10 place additional withes
around it, and as far as possible obey
the Divine iujunctiou-"Whom God
hath Joined together let not man put