v 4maicalt Actish periodical Cada

CLIFTON AYINOI - CINCINNATI 10, OHIO

ir

, YU

PAGE TARS

(LrOmicut

a.warraNIIMIM

s

noorratt e-0-00-00-0-0-0-00-000OnOtts> 00******

the New York law should be enacted! may hold, should not be permitted to and 1886, not less than one divorce I premed. Neither of the rabbis even
o recom- I bfliciate in any way, and should not took place for every four marriages claimed to be familiar with Russian,
s
there,
and (Report
th e co mmission
mended.
of Royal Commis- be recognized or honored in the sync- among the Jewish residents ( I 496,las
distinguished
front actually
Jewish, falsely
law,
I though
one of them
501).
and recklessly testified (fol.
..ion on Divorce and Matrimonial' gigue. A man who canal e
the re-,that "all the rabbis in the United
Causes, dated Nov. 2, 1912, Sections , wrung, done not merely to the par- The "record" (Fobs 330-5)
cent New York Appellate Division States are sending rabbinical di-
466, 470 and 528 VII, and the "Evi- ' ties, but to the children that may sub-
dente," reprinted in the London sequently be born of them, is a men- decison of Chertok vs. Chertok sapra vorces to Russia." The Petrograd
Jewish Chronicle of Nay. 25, 1910, are to the community. Some rule of discloses the remarkable fact that rabbi testified that rabbinical di-
vorcvs granted since the Soviet re-
and Dec. IC, 1910.1 practice governing such cases should the wife in Russia-after receivin
1918 the "Get" prepared by a gime are not recognize , as
In England, the invalidity of a be formulated, and an example in
,
rabbi
in
New
York
at
the
instant
Russia (fol. 342). The lawyer testi-
rabbinical divorce, where one arty
should be made (of the first offender.
States.
p
As said by Judge Clark:
other Where the state law has divorced the of the husband, also residing there, fled (fols. 273-4) that a "letter of
ided in that country and the
through
a
rabbi
of
Petrograd,
where
"The defendant's legal domicile res
Retiree written by a rabbi having the
n Russia, was adjudged in Friedberg parties, the Get should follow, as a
ided-evidently doubted the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical dis-
having been in Buffalo at the time the v. Friedberg; reported in the Jewish matter of course, upon the presenta-
■
he
s
so-called Odessa divorce was granted, Chronicle, Oct. 16, 1908, p. 17. tion of the proper certificate of the validity of the "Get" even in Russia. trict where the wife realties. Apart
Accordingly, as appeared from her from not quoting statutes or deci-
the rabbi in this city had no jurisdic-
vigorous attack or the validity decree of divorce. The husband's
tion to grant a divorce effectual in of A
a "Get" delivered in England was actual consent need not be required. testimony, taken in Russia by depo- sions, he did not explain how the
sition, she procured an independent rabbi here acquired "jurisdiction"
ountry against a person having
c
nutde in 1840 already, in Moss vs. Consent need not be required. Con- civil divorce in Russia, under th •
this
residence and domicile in the State
over the husband, despite his refer-
Granger's Re- sent maybe presumed, and the legal
Smith, 1 M MI ill1f, and.
Soviet law', in May, 1921. In view ence to "jurisdiction." No English
of New York."
ports 228, 231-4, but the court did presumption thus arising should be of this fart, the evidence as to the work has been found, citing any Rus-
econd marriage contracted by
A s
not pass on the gene rat question , considered irrefutable."
the wife in New York State was ac-
A curious decision concern ing the supposed recognition of such "Get" sian statutes or decision, sustaining
itself with holding that
-despite the ordinary rules as to such divorces.
cordingly declared null. About a contenting
no valid divorce was proved, because' effect of a "Get" issued in this court-
"Conflict of Laws"-in Russia de-
year ago the New York Appellate Di-
o . try was rendered by Judge Tierney
As hereinbefore pointed (out, our
serves chose scrutiny. One difficulty
vision of the Supreme Court in the the written "Get" was not itself pr
dosed. At that time, however, the in the New York Supreme Court in
courts do not recognize divorces as
first department unanimously held a English law authorized granting of the undefended divorce case of Shit- in connection with all these cases is
valid, where the tribunal granting the
that
"foreign
law"
is
a
question
of
rabbinical divorce granted under divorces only by eccleciastical courts, , man vs. Shilman, 105 Misc. Reports
fact, to be proved by the testimony sante has not jurisdiction over both
similar circumstances absolutely il-
and it was doubtful, if Jews could • 461. There the "Get" was delivered
husband and wife. ISchouler's "Mar-
legal. This was in the case of Cher- have been divorced at all, if not by in this country, and far fro giving of witnesses, like other facts, and,
riage, Divorce," etc., 6th Kit., 1921,
tok vs. Chertok, 208 App. Div. 161, their own rabbinical tribunals. Soars it effect as terminating the marriage, accordingly, with unreliable wit-
pp. 2079-2080; 22 Am. Law Review
nesses,
the
conclusion
on
tae
same
where husband and wife were mar- after the English Act of 1857 vested it was treated us barring a judicial
580; Dicey's "Conflict of Laws (3d
ried Warsaw by a rabbi, and the the ordinary courts with jurisdiction divorce in this stale for adultery, on question of foreign law may be dia-
metrically opposite in different cases. Ed , 1021, pp. 43, 46-7, 285, 293,
husband thereafter came to the
t h t the husband by
h
- lit
•
19 Corpus Juris,
.
I the Chertok case, the evidence that 468, 823-847),
'fed 'quits. At the instance of the over the grant of divorces, the
thewife,
had
been
lo a
the Russian law recognizes such rab- pages 362, 368-9, 375] and authori-
wife, who remained in Russia, he Rabbi of England ceased to authority s
Jewish ecclesiatstical divorces, until' guilty of procuring or conniving at
went to a rabbi in New York City after a regular judicial divorce had the subsequent "remarriage" of the binical divorces, where one of the ties cited above.
and secured a rabbinical divorce, to been granted, as was testified to by wife, and therefore could not cum- parties resides in, and the other out-
In New York (Mid in many of our
be delivered in Russia, and such de- Chief Rabbi Merman Adler before the plain of her relations with the second side of, Russia, was very flimsy. gates), a divorce granted by a for-
Three witnesses may be regarded as eign court, affecting the marriage of
livery took place, and he there after
British Royal Commission on Divorce Mall/
having testified for the defendant- one who was at the time one of its
married another wife here. Our Ap-
The need of preparing an authori-
husband in favor of the validity of residents, will not be recognized as
pellate Division, reversing the lov:er and Matrimonial Causes supra. The
British Jewish authorities adopted tative and convincing "Harmonize- the divorce under Russian law, a
grount ,
court, annulled this second marriage
this course, in consequence of a rul- lion of the Jewish and civil laws of Brooklyn rabbi, an American lawyer, valid, except for the one reco gnizes
on the ground that the divorce win
ing by the British Registrar General, marriage and divorce" has engaged who had formerly practiced as a law- adultery, which the state
illegal, and in spite of evidence that Sir George Graham, in 1866, declin- the particular attention of the Cen- yer in Russia, and a rabbi in Russia. as sole sufficient ground for termin-
despite such diversity of residence in
ing to recognize the validity of an • tral Conference of American Rabbis, The plaintiff called no witnesses on acing a marriage in its town courts
different countries, such divorce is English rabbinical divorce. As they • which published scholarly papers on the question. None of the three (Gould vs. Gould 235 N. Y. 14; Hub-
i in
supposed to be recognized as vald
also took the position, however, that this subject in 1515 by the Rev. Drs. quoted any Russian statute or de- bard vs. Ilubbard 228 N. Y. 81, 85),
Russia. The Appellate sion aid: a Jewish religious divorce was neces- K. Kohler and Abraham Simon in cision on the question of conflict and while this rule has been qualified
"The whole defense her: is based sary, in order to give religious sane- Vol 25 of its "Year Books" (pp• 335-
as to divorces decree , by
of laws involved, nor, for that In
on the ruhbincial divorce obtained by
378 and 379-402). The seriousness ter, any Jewish decision, either, and states, acquiring jurisdiction over
lion to a judicious civil divorce I
both parties, the exception is limited
defendant front a rabbi in the among Jews, and that they would not of the problem is indicated by figures
none was cross-examined on the to sister states, based, as it is, on the
Borough of Brooklyn, New York remarry a divorced Jew or Jewess collated by our government "Bureau
basis of the principle of Jewish law Federal constitutional provision re-
City, while defendant was domiciled otherwise, the practice was continued i of the Census, Special Report, Mar-
-applied by the Napoleonic Sanhed- quiring each "state" to give full faith
in New York City under tae jurisdic- there, too, as in France and under the riage and Divorce" of 1509, which
rin-that the law of the land is su-
tion of the laws of this state.
New York statute on the part of shows that in Poland, between 1867
"The Constitution of the State of
Orthodox Jews, of granting a "Get"
New York (Art. 1, Sec. 9) provides:
after a lawful judicial divorce had
Nor shall ( any divorce be granted been granted. In England, even be- ,
*otherwise than by due judicial pro-
fore the British Royal Divorce Com-
ceedings.' In view of this, and of
mission met, the chief rabbi and his
the inhibition contained in Sec. 1450
legal advisers had contemplated tab-
of the Penal Law, we must hold that
ng measures to stop the granting of ,
the writing, purporting to be a di-
illegal "Gets" among ignorant immi- I
vorce obtained front a rabbi in Brook-
grant Jews residing there, by crim-
lyn, cannot be recognized as having
inally prosecuting rabbis granting
any effect in this state or as having
them on some such theory of "falsely
been validated by what was done in
impersonating a public official" or
Russia.
"contempt of court," as is suggested
"It would be a curious anomaly in
in the reservations in ex-Judge Jo-
law to recognize at having any va-
achimson's by-laws.
lidity here, an act expressly pro-
The whole subject was ably ex-
hibited by statute, and made punish-
pounded by David Werner Amram of
able as a misdemeanor. Although a Philadelphia (professor of law in the
divorce may have been perfected in
University of Penasvlvas , a and prob-
Russia, according to the law prevail- shly nYest living authority on
ing there, by the delivery of the al-
the Jewish law of divorce), in a pa-
leged divorce granted by a rabbi in
'ter read by hint in Jone, 1907, before
New York City, the act of the local
the Convention of Union and Ortho-
rabbi in granting it was not thereby do Cos•gegations on "The Jewish
rendered consonant wits the law pre-
Law and the Law' of the State in Mat-
vailing here. The rabbinical divorce
ters of Divorce," in the course of
must be regarded as having had its
which he said (Jewish Exponent and
inception in the paper issued by the
Menorah Monthly, Vol. 35, pp 15-
Brooklyn rabbi, and although the
:
Russian government may recognize 18) "The
Jews in this city do not form
it, the divorce is void in its inception a separate community, governed by
under our law.
their own laws. They are citizens of
"We cannot regard it as a divorce
the state and, as such, their legal
obtained in Russia. The record indi- status is fixed by the laws of the
cates that what was done in that state. In Russia the laws provide
country was intended merely to give that the Jews shall, to a large extent,
effect there to the rabbinical divorce be governed by their own law, and
obtained in Brooklyn."
the Jewish law is in force in Russia,
Some years ago, where a husband not because it is a separate system
was proceeded against for bigamy of equal authority, but because the
under similar circumstances, the Russian law has adopted its provi-
Judge in the New York Court of Gen- sions in so far as they are applicable
that if he
eral Sessions an
to the administration of the internal
succeeded in getting hold of the rabbi affairs of the Jew.... But as long as
who granted such "Get," he would there is no Jewish state, there can
give him the limit in criminal pro- be no Jewish civil law enforceable,
ceedings against him. (People vs. and matters purely civil must be reg-
Solomon Herman, Court of General ulated by the law of the state in
Sessions, decided Feb. 1, 1904, at re- which the parties are domiciled.
ported in Albert M. Friedenberg's Upon those who, nevertheless, con-
"Collection of American Jewish sider the Get essential, rests the duty
Cases," publication of the American of regulating the giving of the
Jewish Hostorical Society, Vol. 12, so that the conflicts which so fre-I
page 99.) Bigamy proceedings were quently occur between the laws of
based on a second marriage, follow- the state and the Jewish law may be
ing such illegal rabbinical divorce, in avoided. It should be ordained that
Sokel vs. People, 212 Illinois 238.
any person who presides at the giv-
In England, Chief Rabbi Herman ing of a Get, where the paeties have
Adler, Dr. Israel Abrahams, Mr. Hen- not been previously divorced by . the
riques and Mr. Alexander testified to laws of the state, shall be punished
the same effect in 1910 before the so far as is in the power of the Jew-
should be de-
British Divorce Commission, and in ish authorities.
order to stop such abuses, they rec- prived of any official position that he
ommended that a statute similar to

vorce, at the instance of the husband,
delivery to the wife in Buffalo
for ough all Orthodox rabbi there, and
thr
te validity of a rabbinical di-
while was
h
sustained in a ccasewhere
sorce
both parties resided in Russia, it was
held that lack of jurisdiction over one
of the parties vitiated the document
where one resided in the United

193

TI
J

Z11

► SS

000041100001a0rXMOCH:14SY

A. J. McINNES

Natural Dirtrtnr

LICENSED EMBALMER

15941 WOODWARD AVENUE
Hemlock 4798

s

.

ocsestua*88e8la00-880-0 00000*********

UNITEDBOOKINGASSOCIATION

Established is 1916.

ENTERTAINERS FURNISHED
FOR ALL OCCASIONS

HENRY H. LUEDERS, Managing

Director.

112 MADISON AVENUE
Randolph 8835
At Grand Circus Park

Always in the future - yet just over the threshold -
how will it find you?

Will tomorrow find your estate one of the vast army
that proves the rule-

"Nine out of ten estates are
dissipated within seven years"?

irfle,

"Preparedness"-the only hope of a civilized world
against a repetition of the horrors of a world war
Preparedness-the only hope of the preservation and
development of your estate.

you

WO-

rvice
flat
rued

"HE LEAVES A WIDOW AND CHILDREN"-
HOW?

gives
rani).
shed,

it
Your estate administered as you would have
administered-carrying out the terms of your will
-these are the duties and the obligations of the
Fidelity Trust. Company.

Get,

try

S

--

You car, make an appoint-
ment with our trust
officer today.
.

He

a

0
0

a

THE STYLER PRESS

Stylers of Good

The Services We
Offer You

Printin,f,r

ADMINISTRATORSHIP

C. C. BERGHOEFFER, Prop.

EXECUTORSHIP

TRUSTEESHIP UNDER
- WILLS, LIVING TRUSTS
- AND INSURANCE
TRUSTS

L(°C

FOR--SHELB-Y GARAGE BUILDING
Phone Main 561-7---,

GUARDIANSHIP

PROPERTY

6.2

st 7s Ig rillf I s s

ESCROW AGENT

R WLIZTETAMANS

The

TRANSFER AGENT AND
REGISTRAR FOR COR.
PORATE STOCK

MUNICIPAL. PUBLIC
UTILITYJNOUSTRIAL ,
REAL ESTATE BONDS

Sass Dairy Co.

9150 TWELFTH STREET

Half

Block North of Clairmount.

HOME MADE BUTTER

Direct from Our Churn to Your Table.

FRESH COUNTRY EGGS
Other Dairy Products

RECEIVERSHIPS

BUSINESS MANAGE-
MENT, REORGANIZA.
TION OR LIQUIDATION

Trust
Service

Not one man in a thou.
sand knows the full extent
of presen t day trust service
-such service has become
a positive necessity.
You may have you
should have a copy of our
booklet "Trust Service".

-

It will go forward on
receipt of your request.

.
USTI_COMPANY
147 W 9 cuN'GREpS ST

