THE LADIES’ WORLD.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2370, 10 December 1908, Page 7

THE LADIES’ WORLD.

THE LAWS OF DIVORCE.

AN AMERICAN VIEW

In that fine paper, the. “Ladies’ Home Journal,” the editor, in a striking article, discusses the problem of divorce. The article says:— This magazine is constantly asked by its readers to deplore the increasing number of divorces or to indorse the clamor for stricter divorce laws. . But our friends overlook one fact: wo have repeatedly said that we do not believe that the demand for more rigid divorce laws is the wisest or fairest solution of the problem before us. THE WAY TO THE ALTAR. The trouble with us is not that it is so easy to get a divorce, but that it is too easy to get married. We have a notion in this country that it is “un-American”—whatever that may mean—to nlaco the slightest obstacle in the way of two hearts that want to be mated. The way to the marriage altar must be unobstructed, wo say. All this is very pretty in theory, but how does it work out in practice ? Is it fair to our young people that we leave the way to the marriage altar so open and so unobstructed that they can under the influence of a mistaken momentary impulse, an emotional moonlight rhapsody, .a temporary ball-room infatuation, see ;a clergyman or civic offiecr, and be joined together for the rest of their lives? Is it wise to leave the way to the marriage altar so open that four young couples, filled with the careless fun of" an evening’s hav-ride, can stop at a parson’s house and get married “just for fun,” as they did last summer? Is the marriage altar to lie made so light ot that a girl, piqued because the bridegroom does not appear on time—detained by bis mother’s serious illness, as it afterwards developed—-can jump into a waiting carriage outside with a friend present, drive to a minister’s house and return to the wedding party married? Is it wise to leave the way to the marriage altar so unobstructed that a bride, standing at k" that .altar, can “change her mind” iand marry the best man instead of the prospective bridegroom, as happened recently ? Is it fair to young people, full of the love of fun, that in one part of the country, at least, a man can, in jest, refer to the girl, in the presence of a third party, as his wife, and the two are, in the . s eyes of the law of that State, legally married if the girl chooses to hold the man to the joke? All this is leaving the way to the marriage altar open, yes, wide open; but pray what does it make of the marriage —j" altar itself but a jest and a mockery? WHERE FOLLY RUNS RIOT. It is easy enough to sav, apropos of the instances cited, that they are exceptional: that they are the pranks 'of silly and heedless girls and boys. But that is not the point. Pray whal else does a youth consist of but heedlessness and folly? The real point is that such serious pranks are made" possible by our marriage laws; that we lallow those laws to be so lax that such exceptional instances can occur, making a joke of one of our most .sacred institutions. It is idle to blame young people who nerpetrate these Sollies. It- is we elders who are to if a me: it is due to our mistaken &otions that the way to the marriag© altar must bo left open without those proper and sufficient safeguards youthful lack of knowledge 'Which our young have a right to expect we- shall provide for them. is not only absolute folly, but it- is also manifestly unfair, to leave the way to marriage so wide open as to make possible the most mistaken marriages, and then bar the door at the jfc otlier end and make escape by divorce increasingly difficult. Yet that is exactly what w r e are planning to do in all this unreasoning clamor for stricter divorce laws. THT FRONT DOOR FIRST. If we want to call a halt to the present increase in divorce which is rightly disturbing us so much, let us begin at the right end :at our marriage laws, and surround them with safeguards. If it is deemed so criminally “un-American” to follow the wise European method, born of the of hundreds of years of experience, to proclaim and publish an intention- of marriage from ten to thirty days before the actual- ceremony, let us not forget the significant act that the Society of Friends in this country (or “Quakers,” as we popularly choose to designate them) follow the spirit of this -custom, with the result that divorces are singularly few among them. Well might we, of Protestant faith, learn wisdom in the recent enlightened orders issued by the Roman Catholic Church in America, that matrimonial engagements hereafter be reported -in writing "r-o the priests of the Church. It is true that the Roman Catholic Church prohibited divorce before providing this recent safeguard to the entrance of matrimony, but it is highly significant that the Church authorities have deemed it expedient and necessary to make the provision. The time lias come for us to recognise that what we intended as an unobstructed path to the marriage ’altar lias become a pa t h of unprotected danger: that liberty has been confused with and instead, of ourselves with such mistaken agitated zeal over securing stricter divorce laws, that we turn to « proper ’and decent safeguarding of our marriage laws. When we have tightened the lock on the front door a bit, then let us think of tightening the screws on the back door. Blit let us fix the front door first.