DIVORCE IN ENGLAND.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXV, Issue 5040, 11 August 1903, Page 2

DIVORCE IN ENGLAND.

Tho civil judicial statistics for 1901 show once, more how increasingly numerous are the failures in marriage (says the London “ Daily Chronicle ”). Tho separations orders in 1803 were 525, or 2.77 per 100,000 of population. In 1897 the figures had increased to 17.81, and in 1901 to 22.47. Durham seems to be the most matrimonially unhappy county iu tho country. Tho proportion of separation orders is 48 por 100,000; in Lancashire, 40. London is better behaved, for it is listed as low as 18 por 100,000. In BlackluiaSi and Bolton there was the high record of 93 per 100,000, Leeds 62. Petitions for judicial separation liavo been almost stationary for six years. Petitions for divorce have increased. Military officers, soldiers and sailors are prominent figures in this part of the returns. Even journalists rank high among the divorce statistics. Another subject connected divorce proceedings is aitivml ingV’atUuition, namely, the trouble that arose over tho remarriage of All- W. K. Vanderbilt. The strictures of tho Bishop of London. upon all and sundry who took part in that ceremony have not Xiassou without challenge. His lordship was e-pecialiy severe upon Dr. Tristram, his own Diocesan Chancellor, and Dr. Tristram lias retaliated with a vigorous defence. He shows clearly that it is obligatory upon him. under tho Divorce Act, to grant licenses for tho remarriage of divorced* persons; that such pereons are entitled to the nso of tho parish church for Dio celebration ef their marriago by the minister of the parish, or, if ho should object, by any _ clergyman entitled and willing to officiate. Dr. Tristram added that many complaints had boon made of tho clergy refusing to officiate, or to provide a minister, for tho marriago of innocent and successful parties in divorce suits, or even to permit tho churches to be used for that purpose. In such cases, he had advised tho complaining persons to obtain a mandamus against the clergyman for damages. A more remarkable feature of Dr. Tristram’s statement related to what he described as “an organised system of intimidation” to prevent tho remarriage of divorced persons. Private detectives are employed to learn when, and whore such marriages are to take place, _ and the bride or bridegroom, or their friends, are informed that a protest will be publicly lodged by someone attending tho ceremony. Dr. Tristram added that tho “nuisance” had become so serious at tho London Registry that lie had given orders that no information was to bo afforded to strangers, and no access bo allowed to papers connected with divorce licenses, without an order from himself. There have been two or three divorce suits of more than usual note. Lady Cowell-Stepney, who lias been living apart from her husband since 1876, has obtained a judicial separation. For over 25 years Sir Arthur Cowoll-Step-ney has laboured under some strango illusions about his wife, and, though writing civil letters to her, ho would never ro&ide with her. Ho some tirao ago naturalised himself as an American, and lately married a lady in tho States. His English wife has now obtained a judicial separation, which was not resisted.