Show 01 tt Al JURIST The Indiana granted ned a divorce to a tall fair because her husband J had falsely 1 to her that be w was a baptized per person on by that one OM act has hae done more to beat down 18 respect for ter the courts c art and for tor forthe the marriage tie than anarchy and free 11 love do in III a j en one of that sort or of thing being done In America y In the twentieth n century wIth school homes on every hilltop and occasionally one In Ina I a valley Taney one ceases to wonder at the increase In crime and regrets that Captain lI should have been hanged eo 0 soon Just what part ot of any divorce law lawin In any state could have been broken by the tho Ca false on the part of the husband that he had been bap tilled Hued is III not clear to the norma normal mind I Iad and ad it Is 18 a safe are assumption that such false statement does docs not turn furnish Ish cause I under tho statute t for r a divorce It If the tho young woman had taken the tho poet I that baptism Is a part or of personal s and that failure to be I baptised shoved that her husband lacked Jacked that attribute Is next to toi godliness there might have been some somo I In It It If she he had pleaded that the tho fa that he had deceived her bel In this ar argued argued II gued that he had deceived her about other silent salient things s with which she had not yet caught up ono one have i breu brought ht his understand lug Into play pIa and argued that It brought such supreme distress to her that she could no longer endure It It was apparently the act ot of a r f elevated by a tool fool mistake to the place where ho he could assist In the tho manufacture of mistakes It Is to be hoped that iiii hili like will not soon bo be I seen sean again II |