THE INNOCENT DIVORCED PERSON
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—Nothing is to be gained in controversy by anything approaching to rudeness, and Mr. R. H. Loveday and Dr. Geikie-Cobb injure their cause when they call their opponents Pharisees. Surely what we all ought to strive for is a whole- some view of the seriousness and sanctity of wedlock. Parents and all who can influence young people might teach them to look upon marriage in a sober light, very far removed from the " freak weddings " with which the more frivolous sort of Americans (and some Britons) have unfortunately amused themselves.
For myself, I am unwilling to allow the term " innocent " to a husband who goes back on his word and by process of law discards an erring wife with the intention of providing himself with another spouse as soon as may be. When he stood at the altar he was there as one who asserts marriage to be indissoluble save by death. The Rev. A. T. Fryer properly writes, " The marriage relation must be either permanent or not permanent ; it cannot be both unless the parties concerned are at liberty to 'choose which character they please and act accordingly."
Let us remember how a brave and right-minded Englishman bore himself when a terrible calamity fell upon him. Thackera3r wrote in 1852, " Though my marriage was a wreck, I would do it over again, for, behold, love is the crown and completion of all earthly good." Indeed most of life's difficulties can only be solved by patience and Christian love—the very opposite to self-gratification—a love which suffereth long and
is kind.—I am, Sir, &c., ST. JOHN BROWNE. Thorn don, Antrim Road, N. W. 3.
Previous page
