MARRIAGE LICENSES.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1043, 4 February 1911, Page 5

MARRIAGE LICENSES.

BISHOP AND CHANCELLOR DISAGREE. By Tclesraph—Press Assaciatisn-CoDjrleSt. 1 (Rec. February 3, 10.30 p-m-) . Uoncfon, February 3. , Dr. Tristram, Chancellor of the Dio-' ceso of London, in a letter to th« Bi'Jhop of London (Dr. Ingrain) stated! that after tho Deceased Wife's Sister Act had been passed the Archbishop oE! Canterbury (Dr. Davidson) had requested him to issue licenses as Chancellor to those authorised to marry under the Act, also to innocent divorced; parties. Hie Primate considered it, desirable that all marriages under the; Decease:! Wife's Sister Act should bei by license, instead of by banns in order! to prevent parties to a marriage beingj subjected t-o annoyances. REGENT LEGISLATION. • The Bishop of London disagrees wittt the position taken up by Dr. Tristram! regarding the issue of 'marriage licenses,; and it is possible that the. difficulty will' reach the Law Courts. Tho Bishop instructed Dr. Tristram that 110 license for a marriage with a divorced person,, or of a person wjth his deceased wife's sisfer, was to be issued v;ithout the* Bishop's personal assent ill writing. Dr. Tristra;n replied that "ho was bound'.to'! observe the law of the Kingdom, even* when it was at variance with the-i Bishop's opinion.

The Deceased Wife's Sister's Marriage-, Act, 1907, declares 'that 110 marriage a deceased wife's sister then subsisting-, or subsequently solemnised, shall onthati account be void or voidable a civili contract. But a clergyman is to bo exempt from liability to any suit, penalty, or censure for any act or omissioni by liini, which would not have rendered? him so liable if the Act bad not beenj. passed. He,', therefore, incurs no liability! whatsoever by refusing to publish the l banns' of, or perform such a marriage,, or." to' allow.it to take place in ~iiis! church. On the other hand, the Act' declares - that, where an incumbent re-i fuses to marry parties, who but for suclii refusal would have a right to be marn ricfl in his church, he may permit: another' clergyman, entitled to officiatein the diocese, who is .willing to do so,' to marry them in the church. Whether, however, the Act, by simply declaring such a marriage not void or voidable as a civil contract, actually gives such a; right seems a doubtful 'question. CHUItCH AND STATE: DANGER OF, , CONFLICT. The Bishop of Liverpool recently stated that there could bo no doubt that in the immediate future'there was a danger e! tho law of the Church coming into collision- with the law of the State oa tho question of divorce, unless our statesmen were guided by the same spirit of fairness., prudence,. and/ > righteousnesswhich characterised their predecessors.. The lay; of the Church was the law of! Christ, that marriage was indissoluble,j and upon that great law depended the' sanotity of the home.

At Wakefield Diocesan Conference re-, cently the Christian ideal of marriage*, was discussed, the Vicar of Wakefield; and tho Bishop of Hull being the pnn-i eipal speakers- They laid it down as' essential that the Church should main-' tain the indissolubility of the marriager tie. The farmer also forecasted a nosisible conflict between Church and State, on this point, even a possible severance. of their relations. A resolution protesting against the grant of any further facilities for divorce by Parliament was carried.

The Bishop of Birmingham, in an ar-. ; tide in bis "Diocesan Magazine," submits that there is no room for doubt that "wo. have a definite law, which is the law of the Western Church as it obtain-' ed before tho Pieformation, viz., that:? marriage is indissoluble! that is admits,' of 'divorce' in the sense of separation a, mensa. et thoro in case of necessity, but: does not admit of divorce at all in tho modern sense—in such sense us would' leave either party in a divorce free to remarry during the lifetime of the other." - There is, he savs, an intense consciousness among Churchmen that they stand, as a Church, upon the .unaltered law of the Church as it stood, in - IGO3, ami that Acts of Parliament have had no effect upon it—that they have but made the law of the State different from the law of the '. Church."