Such blatant misrepresentations as that of O. E. Jones who concocts an idealized fiction in claiming that judges in family law cases had an “unerring judgment as to human nature” were rare.
The practice of jailing for debt was challenged by a Missouri judge, Samuel A. Drew, in 1923, who held that alimony was not a special case and that courts could not be used as collection agencies. But such scupulous rulings were almost never made in alimony cases. (LINK)
A crack in the alimony racket began to reveal itself in Chicago on November 30, 1925 when Judge Harry Lewis made a shocking announcement during one typical proceeding. The papers reported that “Few women divorce seekers will receive alimony in the future from Chief Justice Harry A. Lewis of the superior court, he declared yesterday. One hundred women, who crowded the court waiting their turn to obtain freedom and comfortable alimony awards, gasped as they heard the unprecedented announcement by the court. They also listened to a stinging arraignment of what the judge called “professional alimony diggers.”
“Stop thinking of every alimony victim as absurd and you’ll find many a tragedy caused by this much-abused American institution. What does easy alimony mean? Ruined homes, frequently. Children held as hostages, to exact the last cent from worried fathers who have lost their wives or former wives. Yes, and the rise of the shyster lawyer. The creation of a new class of parasites—the professional correspondents.” (May 22, 1927) (LINK)
Faith Baldwin, the author of the 1929 novel, Alimony, an expose of the racket:
“THE rising tide of divorce has brought us a new industry, the ultimate refinement of golddigging, the perfection of blackmail within the law—marriage for alimony,” said Faith Baldwin, the well-known writer. “Women who do not want husbands or children have found a joker in our marriage laws by which they can establish themselves comfortably for life; free, respectable, rich, safe—without personal cost or sacrifice.”
“There are thousands and thousands of women who are being supported by men to whom they are no longer wives. There is no doubt that this business of alimony is getting to be a serious menace, it may be ail right when a man has plenty of money. To pay a former wife a few thousand dollars in alimony may mean nothing to him. But, on the other hand, just consider how many men are forced to pay alimony who cannot afford it. You will find in the majority of cases that there is no good reason why they should pay it, either. The women are well able to take care of themselves. If they did not lack pride and self-respect, they would not accept money from men who-no longer mean anything to them,” said the writer, with a flash of her deep-blue eyes.” (Sep. 25, 1928) (LINK)
Principal goals ratified by the Alimony Club of America founded July 1930 by three Chicagoans include:
* “To obtain more deliberate action in divorce cases and a more just and equitable adjustment.”
* “To test the constitutionality in all state and federal courts of laws under which men are imprisoned for failure to pay alimony.”
* “To advocate the enactment of laws requiring courts to examine the merits of a divorce case before allowing temporary alimony.
* “To procure the establishment of a court of domestic arbitration in which ordinary domestic difficulty may be arbitrated by a judge in private.”
* “To protect men and society generally against the so-called modern woman who considers marriage a mere step incident to a suit for divorce that she may engage in the business of collecting alimony.”
1933 – “New York Leads Way,” The Helena Independent (Mt.), May 20, 1933 {Alimony Racket}
