THE SUXDAY OREGOSIAX, PORTLAND. SOVJEMBER 21, 1920
1 V Expensive Solution Society '-'-
fe.' 'ft, J Is Finding ior the Problem , : MfeSj,Ppk. ' :
' " " '
Mr. Jennie Emmet French has Just
been Ktutcd a divorce from Wil
liam Bartoa Frencfc, and under the
-terms of settlement hcf allonanec
will be 82,000 a year.
- BY HELEN HOFFMAN.
OPPONENTS of divorce and all di
vorce laws .will be gratified to
note that the cost of alimony
has reached the $100,000-a-year mark
and may go even higher. They will
be inclined to agree that when the
cost of a divorce, which generally in
cludes alimony, reaches a prohibitive
figure, then divorces will go quite
out of style.
The 100,000-a-year divorce settle
ment was not attributed, however, to
the leniency of a sympathetic divorce
.judge. Instead it was due to the
liberality of the husband in the case.
Following the newly established so
ciety code of making a handsome
settlement upon the wife from whom
the courts were expected to part him,
he made her an allowance of $100,000
a year, thereby breaking all records
in the alimony line.
And now comes the announcement
that Mr. and Mrs. "William Barton
French have been divorced and that
under the terms of the divorce settle
ment she will have an annual allow
ance of $62,000 to live on. There have
been other generous divorce settle
ments in recent months, all tending to
a belief in In the existence of a social
code which provides for a more lib
eral treatment of divorced wives in
the matter of alimony than Che law
prescribes.
As the Frenches have been mar
ried only four years, it was a great
shock to society to learn of the di
vorce, for the young couple were
great favorites in the smart social
circles In which they moved.
Chivalrous Husbands.
But what surprised society even
more was the chivalrous attitude
taken bjr the young husband toward
the beautiful young woman who had
cast' him off.
The young wife, who before her
marriage was Miss Jean Emmet, be
longed to a socially important fam
ily, though not rich.
Young French is wealthy, and In
discussing the divorce, he spoke af
fectionately of his wife, and he said
he had generously provided for her.
At the time of their marriage four
years ago he said he settled $500,000
on her, the income from which would
give her an annual income of $50,000,
and this she will have so long as she
does not remarry.
Under the divorce settlement he
said he settled an additional $12,000
a year on the young wife who would
have no more of him. His small
daughter, he said, he would care for
independently of the sum given to
his wife.
Surely nothing could be more gen
erous than such an allowance of
$62,000 a year from a man whose wife
had written finis to their marital
partnership.
No young man wooing the Idol of
his love could have shown in finer
terms his admiration and affection
than young French showed his di
vorced wife.
Why do men treat their wives so
generously, society has been asking.
Is it from a sense of pride? Is it that
they wish to have the world think of
them as generous protectors of their
ex-wives, or does some lingering feel
ing of tenderness inspire such motive,
as well as perhaps a desire in many
cases, to try to make up in cold cash
for any grievance or any wrong that
an angry wife may have felt she suf
fered? At any rate, whatever the motive
is. it is a well-established fact in fash
ionable society that wives fare bet
ter at the hands of their husbands
than they would ordinarily at the
bench of justice, which, to the wife,
most often, means the divorce court.
Many judges have in scathing terms
scored the applicants for heavy ali
mony, claiming that a woman who
desires release from a husband is no
longer entitled to his support.
Justice Charles 1, Guy of New
York in discussing an extraordinary
divorce case, aaia: "if marriage is a
Vrf f- J: ' ' .dJ- -"TiVV'H V The record-breaking alimony received
-V r. V JCrfSTA rr - A PkV t '-HPJ,; " ,. by the divorced wife of layman B.
(1" J- ? vJV f r ' !st!52Sl i I Kendall gives her an allowance of
I IV!i3 4 M '.A; til '-.000 a for l.ft.
lottery, we Bhould not make the capi
tal prize a luxurious alimony. A wife
who elects to cancel the marriage
contract under which she has certain
recognized obligations as well as
rights, must not expect to enjoy aU
the benefits of a happy and success- i
ful married life. She is not entitled
to a life of ease and luxury without
equivalent obligations. The law ac
cords her reasonable and proper sup
port for the station in life which she,
as a married woman has occupied and
based largely upon her former hus
band's resources, but she is not en
titled to any fixed percentage of his
income for life."
Many judges throughout the coun
try whose days are occupied with lis
tening to marital discords, voice sim
ilar opinions to Judge Guy in the
question of alimony.
Not only judges, but leading fem
inists as well, have scored the ali
mony taker, and now with full poli
tical enfranchisement, should women
come to sit on the bench, the woman
alimony applicant would likely fare
even worse at the hands of the court
than she does at present. Crystal
Eastman Benedict, a leader among
feminist speakers and writers, echoes
the opinion of her colleagues when
she declares: ''Alimony is not thought
of by a real feminist. The whole
purpose of the feminist movement is
to get rid of the parasite woman."
But, of course, in such matters, even
the feminist movement Is not apt to
control or influence a change, so long
as hubby, who can afford It, desires
to see his divorced wife kept in com
fort, if not in luxury, and thus reflect
his generosity and, it might well be
noticed in many deplorable cases, per
haps his forgiveness for the woman
who has suffered to put him out of
her life.
As extraordinary as the generosity
of young French was that of Lyman
B. Kendall, whose sum of alimony I
paid to his wife recently, made most
alimony payers look mean and nig
gardly. Aside from property valued
at $4,500,000, Mr. Kendall alloted to
his wife an annual income of $100,000
as long as she lives, and with this he
gave his very good wishes for her
happiness.
After being married some years the
Kendatls drifted apart, according to
his statement, because he preferred
the quiet life of his stock farm In Vir
ginia, while she delighted in New
York society. Kendall made his for
tune after he married his wife, and
therefore felt, no doubt, that she was
entitled to some of it even though
they chose to go their separate ways
after it had accumulated.
Vast, indeed, are tee of the sums
paid to beautiful women who can
celed their marriage contract with
a divorce.
Perhaps tha largest sura of alimony
ever paid outright, was that settled
on the former Mrs. John Jacob Astor.
when she divorced Colonel Astor.
This sum amounted to $10,000,000.
Mrs. Astor Is living off this generous
income in England today, where she
recently took on a title by marrying
Lord Ribblesdale.
i New York society some years ago.
riMi i1 "r,,','wTrmii'riiliH'iitfliiawmiiiirniimi-nfiimfT-T .vj: AmmmsiiiIii wmnfcnitaii I
' Copyright by Central News Photo Service.
The former Mrs. Joha Jacob Astor,
gasped when It was learned thatimony allowance of $36,000 a year
Howard Gould had awarded an all.
H. G. WELLS, WRITER OF FICTION,
NOW TURNS PEN TO HISTORY
- j
Napoleon Described as Most Illuminating Figure, but Adventurer and
Weakling.
A MARVELOUS and
book is H. G. Wells'
fascinating
"Outline of
J- - History."
Speaking of the end of the French
revolution, he says :"The ebb of this
tide of revolution in the world, this
tide which had created the great Re
public of America, and threatened to
submerge all European monarchies,
was at hand. It is as if something
had thrust up from beneath the sur
face of affairs, made a gigantic effort
and spent Itself."
He gives, with rare vision, the
cause of this failure,, not the excel
lence of the new ideas, but the fact
that "men were unprepared for the
creative opportunities this clearance
gave them."
In other words, to refor.ni mankind
bow the bride of Lord Ribblesdale. .who received "10,000,000 from Colonel
Aator wheB the divorce settlement was
I to his wire at their separation, Duti
you must not .only give them a new
idea, but must prepare their minds to
receive it. . ,
He accurately diagnoses our pres
ent industrial ferment. For . the
French revolution was at the bottom
an attack on privileges and property,
"but," he adds, "even now .this crit
icism of property Is still a vast and
passionate ferment rather than a
science."
"And now," he says of Napoleon,
"we come to one of the most illumin
ating figures of history, an adventur
er and a wrecker. Against the back
ground of confusion and . stress and
hope, this strained and , heaving
France and Europe, this stormy and
tremendous daw.n, . appears. , a dark
little. archaiQ. personage, hard, com
- 1 .
made.
since then alimoners have set a new
pace, ana witn recent rortunes given
pact, capable, unscrupulous, imitative j
and neatly vulgar."
Of how France welcomed him he
says: The public was in that state
of moral fatigue -when a strong and
honest man is called for, a wonderful,
impossible healing man who will do
everything for everybody."
: Napoleon, however, . had '"Julius
Caesar rather, than Washington in the
back of his mind.'.'
The Corslcan had a rare opening of
destiny. "Now surely here was op
portunity such as never came to man
before. .Here was a position in which
a . man might well bow himself and
serve 5od and man to the utmost."
Napoleon was capable of no such
high, emprise. Instead of measuring
up to his fate he "could do no more
than strut upon the crest of this
great mountain of opportunity like a
cockerel upon a dunghill."
A Here follows one of the most vivid
and piercing descriptions of all litera
ture. "The figure he makes ' in his
tory is one of almost Incredible self
conceit, of vanity, greed and cunning,
of callous contempt and disregard of
all., who trusted him, and of a gran
diose'ap'ins of 'Caesar, Alexander and
to ex-wives, Howard Gould's allow
ance, by comparison, is quite email.
Mrs. W. Gould Brokaw's divorce
created quite a stir In New York
society a few years ago, when it was
learned that a $30,000-a-year allow
ance went with it, but. society does
not gasp any longer over such com
parative trifles.
Divorce Among the Ancients.
Sharing the profits of, a long mar
ried life, was no doubt what William
Ellis Corey believed to be the right
thing, when he gave his wife $1,000,
000 and then shortly after married
Mabelle Gilman, the one-time chorus
girl. Mr. Corey, who rose from a
laborer to the presidency of the
United States Steel corporation, no
doubt recognized the faithful service
and loyalty of his helpmeet In mak
ing his great stride In the industrial
world, and amassing thereby a con
siderable fortune.
But according to the Rev. Samuel
A. P. Mercer of Chicago, divorces
are as old as the human race, for
In making Investigations and trans
itions from Babylonian cuneiform
Inscriptions, he says he learned from
these, that divorce was a common
occurrence during the reign of Mam
murabl about 2230 B. C. "Having
been granted a divorce," he says, "a
man would pay lHJeral alimony to
his wife and publish the information
that should anyone marry the di
vorcee he would not object."
Charlemagne, which would be purely
comic if it were not caked over with
human blood. UntiLas Victor Hugo
said ,ln his tremendous way, "God was
bored by him, and he was kicked
aside Irko a corner to end his days,
explaining how very clever his worst
blunders had been, prowling about his
dismal hot island shooting birds and
squabbling meanly with an underbred
jailor who failed to show him 'proper
respect.' "
Perhaps the best thing in Mr. Wells'
picture of Napoleon is his explanation
of the Napoleon cult. "Since his time
his name has been one of the utmost
reassurance of doubting men, to the
business man hesitating over a more
than shady transaction, to the clerk
fingering a check that can be easily
altered, to the trustee in want of
ready money, to the manufacturer
meditating the pros and cons -f adul
teration, to thousands of such people
the word 'Napoleon-lc' has come with
an effect ot decisive relief. We live
in a World - of would-be Napoleons.
Half the cells of our jails and many
In our madhouses are St. Helenas. He
was the very embodiment of that
saint clear, self -centered common
sense without sentiment or scruples,
that struggles with our feebler better
nature, that. .may ultimately destroy
mankind." '