Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

BIGAMOUS MARRIAGES

e ON THE INCREASE. (By "E.8.R." in the "Daily Mail.") [There lias lately been note*! in New Zealand, and commented upon from the Bench, an increase in tho number of bigamous marriages for which offenders have been dealt with in tho Courts. In the United Kingdom tliih offcnco has increased to a disquieting extent. The following article oifers some timely itflections upon what is described by tho author as a "peculiarly mean and distressing crime."] For some .time the main feature of calendars of criminal cases for trial at assizes has been the large and disproportionate number of charges of bigamy. A few days ago we were told that out of nearly forty criminal eases for trial at a certain assizes no fewer than neariy half were bigamy, and at other assize courts —inclading tho Central Criminal Court—a similar state of things prevails. These facts would of themselves be sufficiently disconcerting, bat taken in conjunction with another fact, they are most disturbing.

That fact is the present tendency of judges to regard the offence as venial and to refrain from passing other than <1 light or merely nominal sentence. Now this imports great danger to tho community, and at a time when alargo and powerful section of society is devising measures for protecting womanhood"it surely behoves the law to treat, bigamy in an effective and deterrent manner. What is bigamy? Popularly it maj be deiincd as' the offence of goin& through a form of marriage by a person who is already legally married. _ The offence is of ecclesiastical origin, and above all other crimes varies irt degree of moral obliquity. It may bi* merely an offence against the technical requirements of the marriage laws, as when a married woman "marries" or where a married man goes through the ceremony of marriage with a woman to whom he has explained his position. On the other hand, it may bo a felony of the most serious character, and amount to obtaining by fraud possession of a woman, and so doing her irreparable injury. In this last class of case of offences by men, the crime only dilt'ers in technical respect from one which is rightly punishable with penal servitude for life. Surely in such cases the utmost severity of the law should descend upon the criminal, but in practico he is treated with less rigour than many a petty offender against property. Further, in any case, the judge may not award more than seven years' penal servitude I

Now it is all very well to attack the judges, and the attempt to defend them by alleging, that in the majority of cases '"110 particular hurt" has been done to the woman is of 110 avail, as it merely demonstrates the forgiving attitude of woman to a lover; but it should be remembered that judges cannot shock public feeling except at the risk of lessening regard for law and order.

In a few words, it/ is the public itself which is to blame, because of its seeming inability to see that bigamy in such circumstances is something more than an offence against ecclesiastical ordinance. The same public knows that it is a misdemeanour to obtain possession of a woman by false pretcnces, and that it is felonious in the highest degree to obtain such possession without tile consent of she woman. But it cannot now realise that to "obtain" by means of a bigamous marriage is frequently tantamount to obtaining submission by fraud, and that submission procured by fraud cannot bo . properly termed "consent," whatever be the refinements of a singularly unscientific branch of law. And yet it must realise this fact, or it will be futile to try to safeguard womanhood by punishing the rougher sexual offenders who do not call in and the device of a marriage ceremony. These few notes are" 1 written in the hope that they will lead thinking people to consider the question, and assist the judges in stamping out a peculiarly mean and distressing crime.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19180206.2.13

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 119, 6 February 1918, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
671

BIGAMOUS MARRIAGES Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 119, 6 February 1918, Page 3

BIGAMOUS MARRIAGES Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 119, 6 February 1918, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert