OUR MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE LAWS. 233 



its own, determine the relation of a citizen of another State to its laws? 

 How can it impair the obligation of a contract or annul a status be- 

 tween parties, over one of whom it has no jurisdiction, and at the same 

 time give " full faith and credit " to the " public acts " of the other 

 State ? 



That Congress has the constitutional power to pass a law estab- 

 lishing uniform rules of marriage and divorce in the District of Co- 

 lumbia and all the Territories of the United States is beyond question. 

 That it has not the power to pass a law establishing such rules through- 

 out the United States can only be asserted. " Congress shall have 

 power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization and uniform laics 

 on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States " ; and 

 who can conceive of a person being more of a bankrupt in home and 

 fortune than one who has a faithless wife or husband ? Certainly in 

 that view, with the marriage declared a contract within the meaning 

 of the Constitution and its violation a species of bankruptcy, a general 

 bankrupt law might give the courts jurisdiction to relieve a faithful 

 husband or dutiful wife of the onerous conditions of a contract by the 

 assignment of such assets as a worthless wife or husband to a generous 

 and forgiving public. 



There is another mode by which uniformity in the marriage and 

 divorce laws of the States might be attained, whether the opinions of 

 the judiciary could ever be harmonized or not, and that without im- 

 pinging on the delicate question of State rights. Let Congress appoint 

 commissioners to prepare a code of marriage and divorce laws for the 

 District of Columbia and Territories of the United States, and invite 

 each of the States to appoint a commissioner in its own behalf to unite 

 with the commissioners appointed by Congress in forming a commis- 

 sion to codify and prepare a system of marriage and divorce, which, 

 when passed by Congress and adopted by the several States, or any of 

 them, shall have a uniform operation in the District of Columbia and 

 Territories, and throughout the United States, or in those States adopt- 

 ing it. That there is an urgent necessity for Congress alone, or for 

 Congress and the States united, to move earnestly in this matter, is 

 not only seen in the ineffectual efforts of Congress every year to sup- 

 press polygamy, which is fast spreading from Utah into the other 

 Territories, but also in an almost similar condition of society in the 

 States, brought about by the ununiform laws and the conflicting de- 

 cisions of the courts. 



It is discreditable to civilization not to reverse a decision or prin- 

 ciple of law, though of long standing, which is more evil in its con- 

 tinuance than inconvenient in its reversal or repeal. A thing which 

 has outlived its influence for good, or a principle that has no longer an 

 application to the progress of the age, in religion or law, should be 

 abandoned. The spirit of the Constitution and the principles of inter- 

 state jurisdiction adjudicated under it have been insidiously directed, 



