Year: 1871

The divorce bill, which occupied the attention
of the house yesterday, has twofold purpose.
Its first section, whose purport is distinctly ex-
pressed in the title of the bin, prescribes pen
atty of fine or imprisonment for fraud in falsely
personating another or procuring it to be done,
or procuring false testimony to be given, or
making false return of service OF process in
any divorce case Recent experience in other
states has proved that frauds of this kind are
often attempted, and that, when successful
their results are lamentable. We do not know
that House, the New York fraudulent divorce
lawyer, or Others of his kidney, have maze any
such raids in this state as that which cause1 so
much stir in Connecticut, last winter; but such
things are possible here, although the Con-
necticut and New York courts offer a more
favorable field for them; and there can be no
objection 10 a statute imposing heavy penalty
for villainy of that kind. The punishment pro-
posed in this bill-a fine not exceeding one
thousand dollars, or Imprisonment for not more
than two years-cannot certainly be regarded as
excessive.


The object Of the remaining sectionsi Of the
bill is, as expressed in the title, "to amend the
laws relating to divorce" In other words, it is
renewal of the effort annually made to make
divorces easier of attainment, and when accom-
plished more complete extinguishment of all
the relations created by the marriage contract
1t proposes to add to the causes of divorce now
provided by law, gross and confirmed habits
of intoxicatiou, by either party, and the fact
that the parties have lived separately for three
consecutive years next before the date of the
petition for divorce. 1t also does away with
the distinction now existing between a limited
and au absolute divorce, making all divorces
hereafter decreed for any cause, absolute from
the bonds of matrimony, and permitting both
parties to marry again, and provides an easy
method of making absolute, limited divorces
heretofore decreed Another section authorizes
the court granting divorce, to decree alimony to
the husband from the wife's estate, as well as
TO the wife from the husband.


This bill, if it should become a law, would
have the effect of enabling either of the parties
to a marriage, or both by mutual agree
ment, to dissolve utterly their marriage relation,
when they have proved their constancy of pur-
pose by living separate for three years. 1t will
make marriage in the eye of the law, tempo
rary relation to be entered into recklessly, be-
cause it can be dissolved almost at pleasure, or
by unprincipled persons deliberately assumed as
an experiment, to be terminated when it suits
their convenience or caprice.


There are two theories of marriage. One re-
CARDS it as a relation which has its basis in the
nature of man and the constitution of society,
which is in its nature permanent, and which
creates mutual rights and duties which the laws
should recognize aud Defend but cannot
rightfully IMPAIR except as a necessary protec-
ton in those exceptional cases where the con-
duct OF one party has been subversive of the
purposes for which marriage was ordained. The
other theory holds that marriage is a contract,
not essentially different from any other in its
nature or obligation; that it is based upon mu-
tual consent only, and when thas ceases TO exist
the relation should terminate. Some who ac-
cept this theory would consent, in view of the
relations of marriage to society, that some pub
lie and solemn act, like the decree of court,
should announce its dissolution, while Others
maintain that it should be dissolved at pleasure,
like any other partnership by the act of the par
ties themselves.


The former of these theories is that on which
the legislation of this state, as well as of almost
the whole civilized world, is based; the latter is
held by a comparatively few persons, and those
mostly reckless agitators and loose livers. The
effect of the divorce bill now pending, fit should
pass without material amendment, would be a
long step in the direction of conforming our
laws to this degrading theory of marriage.