Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

WHEN HUSBAND

IS THE COM-
PLAINANT.

Wife as well as husband may marry again.

WIFE'S RIGHTS in the Act being limited to the husband; for whose relief and accommodation the legislature interposes. But she is not interdicted; and as the marriage is annihilated by the Act, it is a logical consequence that she should have the same liberty to marry again as her husband. Some have doubted this; but the courts are not likely to countenance a doubt which, if encouraged, might prove portentous to the peace of many families.

WIFE'S RIGHTS
WHEN COM-

PLAINANT.

SECTION IV.

WIFE'S RIGHTS WHERE SHE HAS BEEN THE SUITOR
FOR DIVORCE.

THERE are only three instances in which the wife has succeeded in obtaining a parliamentary divorce against her husband (x); the inclination of the legislature being to discourage such applications on the part of the wife, except in cases of great and extraordinary enormity.

When, however, a bill does pass at the suit of the wife against her husband, she will be permitted, by an express clause, to marry again immediately on the passing of the Act.

The property clauses in divorce bills by the wife against the husband are substantially the same as those which are found in divorce bills by the husband against the wife.

They enact that if the injured wife marry again, she and her after-taken husband shall have the same rights respectively as if the divorced husband were dead.

They also enact that the divorced husband shall be excluded from all claim upon her estates, and upon her goods, chattels, and personal ornaments "enjoyed by her

(x) Macqueen's House of Lords. Introductory chap. upon Divorce, p. 474.

in possession in her own right," or which she may after- WIFE'S RIGHTS wards acquire, &c.

In short, she seems to be restored, so far as her own property is concerned, to the position in which she stood before her marriage.

But there is no express provision made to determine what her rights shall be as regards the property of the divorced husband. For anything appearing in the Act to the contrary, she may still, notwithstanding the divorce, claim dower out of her divorced husband's estate at his death, and her distributive share of his personal property.

WHEN COM-
PLAINANT.

SECTION V.

HUSBAND'S RIGHTS WHERE THE WIFE HAS BEEN THE
SUITOR FOR DIVORCE.

THE divorced husband is not expressly permitted to marry again during the life of his injured wife. But where there is no positive interdiction, a liberty not given in words may be construed by implication.

In the event, however, of his so marrying again, his injured wife being still alive, it may not be very easy to define the rights that may thereupon accrue. When the case arises, justice will no doubt be done.

HUSBAND'S

RIGHTS WHEN
WIFE IS COM-
PLAINANT.

CHAPTER X.

LIABILITIES ARISING FROM THE DISSOLU-
TION OF THE MARRIAGE BY PARLIAMEN-
TARY DIVORCE.

HUSBAND'S

LIABILITIES

WHEN COM

PLAINANT.

SECTION I.

HUSBAND'S LIABILITIES WHERE HE HAS BEEN THE
SUITOR FOR DIVORCE.

DOES the husband's liability for his wife's debts, contracted by her when sole, cease on the passing of the divorce bill, as is the case when the marriage is dissolved by her death? There are no words in the Act to help our determination. And the lights of reason and justice produce different effects on different minds. Much will depend on the prior solution of other difficulties already suggested (a). This matter it were well to regulate by an express clause in divorce bills hereafter.

Under the present practice of Parliament I am not aware of any other liability to which the injured husband becomes subject on the passing of a divorce bill, except the obligation of satisfying the provision which is made in favour of the divorced wife at the instigation of the "Lady's Friend" in the House of Commons.

(a) See Chap. IX. sect. II. supra, p. 212.

LIABILITIES ARISING FROM THE DISSOLUTION, ETC.

217

SECTION II.

WIFE'S LIABILITIES WHERE THE HUSBAND HAS BEEN WIFE'S LIABITHE SUITOR FOR DIVORCE.

We have seen that by the common law on the dissolution of the marriage by the husband's death, the liability of the wife to personal execution in respect of debts contracted by her when sole, revives (b); such debts forming no charge against the deceased husband's representative. Then is the same consequence to ensue on the passing of the divorce bill? This question, like the others, should be obviated by an express clause.

LITIES WHEN

HUSBAND IS COMPLAINANT.

SECTION III.

WIFE'S LIABILITIES WHERE SHE HAS BEEN THE
SUITOR FOR DIVORCE.

THERE will be less difficulty in holding that the wife's individual responsibilities revive against her in this case, because the husband is stripped of his marital rights by the Act; and whatever property she has ought of course to be subject to the demand of her creditors.

A case of hardship, however, might arise. The Divorce Act only bars the husband's claim supon his wife's property. It does not deprive him of that which, by the act of matrimony, had become his own property. Therefore, if he had gotten a fortune in cash by his wife, the legislature would not compel him to pay it back, or any part of it, to his

(b) See supra, p. 184.

WIFE'S LIABI

LITIES WHEN

COMPLAINANT.

WIFE'S LIABI-
LITIES WHEN

COMPLAINANT.

wife. Perhaps, therefore, in such a case, if there were debts incurred by the wife dum sola, it would be thought fit not to relieve the divorced husband from their pressure. This, I apprehend, would be a fit case for a special clause in the bill.

HUSBAND'S

LIABILITIES

WHEN WIFE IS
COMPLAINANT.

SECTION IV.

HUSBAND'S LIABILITIES WHERE THE WIFE HAS BEEN
THE SUITOR FOR DIVORCE.

IT cannot be supposed that the legislature intends to favour a husband whose misconduct has occasioned the passing of a divorce bill. Then is he to be relieved from the obligations to which he became subject by the marriage? This cannot be affirmed in the absence of any express clause to that effect. But it must be observed, on the other hand, that by the Act he is deprived of all the wife's property. And the justice of continuing the liabilities to which he was exposed during the coverture, or of absolving him from them, may perhaps more conveniently be determined by a consideration of the particular circumstances of each case, rather than by the operation of general rules; which, if they exist at all, have certainly not yet made their appearance in the books of the law.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »