"The impulse which inspires a desire for a dissolution of an intolerable matrimonial alliance, is as fundamental to human nature as the one which inspires a desire for marriage, and is oft times far more moral. Therefore, to require the commission of immoral and degrading acts on the part of one of the parties to a marriage before a divorce can be granted, regardless of why it is desired, places an unwarranted premium upon immorality, and degrades society equally as much as it does the one committing the offense.
Not only does this policy of the law foster immorality, but immorality increases in proportion as the law becomes more drastic. Surely, the Nevada law is more moral than that of New York, which permits divorce for adultery only. New York has the most drastic law of any of the States; as a consequence it has in proportion to the population, about seven times as many proven cases of adultery as any other State. There are nearly four times as many such cases there, as in the neighboring State of Pennsylvania. This is not because the good people of New York are so much worse than their neighbors, but because the law requires that residents of the former State, who desire divorce, commit adultery; unless they have the time, money and inclination to go to Reno.
The effort to compel men and women to live together against their own free will, which is the purpose of stringent divorce laws, has caused even more immorality inside of marriage than it has outside. Immoral conditions are never so dangerous as when they exist in marriage. And besides, the fundamental policy of our laws which not only permits, but requires an investigation of divorce causes, is highly productive of evil. Many of the divorce cases in New York are simply food for a set of morbidly curious scandal-mongers. Even the Mohammedans consider our practice in this respect extremely vulgar: there is no more reason why a court should know why a husband and wife wish to separate than why they wish to marry.
Nevada most certainly has the most sane and moral divorce laws of any of the States. More than half a century ago, in 1861, Nevada enacted its divorce laws in their present form. It then, as now, provided for only six months residence before filing suit. This was in line with its other liberal legislation and with legislation in other Western States. This divorce statute included, and still includes, seven causes of action: impotency, adultery, desertion for one year, conviction of a felony, gross drunkenness, cruelty and failure of the husband for a period of one year to provide the common necessities of life.
In addition to this there is another splendid feature of the Nevada divorce law. It is not necessary to have witnesses, except to prove the fact that one is a resident in Nevada. The plaintiff's testimony is sufficient, unless the case is contested.
This law eliminates the despicable bribing of witnesses which so often happens in other states. It also eliminates the obscene, immoral and vulgar courtroom discussions which are often the result of calling witnesses in divorce cases.
The wisdom of this early legislation in Nevada is shown by the fact that more than fifty years afterwards the United States Commission of Uniform Legislation, in preparing a law on divorce to be offered for adoption by all states, has recommended Nevada's statute almost word for word. It should be remembered that this Commission is made up of the greatest thinkers of modern times: lawyers, jurists, professors, moralists and statesmen.
No one criticises Nevada's causes for action. It is admitted that divorce, when it results from any one of these causes, is the only remedy for unfortunate relations, which, without such remedy, would injure society. A great majority of the leading thinkers and writers in our churches today admit that these causes of action are not too broad.
I believe that Maryland has one of the most lenient divorce laws of any of the Southern States. A divorce is granted to residents after three years' separation. The decree is granted to the one deserted.
Some of the Eastern and Southern States, in this respect, are still in the throes of the dark ages.