MARRIAGE AMENDMENT BILL

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 29, 29 October 1920, Page 8

MARRIAGE AMENDMENT BILL

COMMITTEE SUPPORTS COUNCIL'S 'CLAUSE WARM DEBATE IN THE HOUSE BILL STILL IN SUSPENSE The Marriage Amendment Bill, containing th« clause dealing with "mixed marriages," was before the Hou.«. of Representatives again yesterday. This Bill was passed originally a.s a purely machinery measure in the House. When it reached the Legislative Council a newclause was add(d making it an oh'ence for any person to question the validity of a legal marriage in this country. The Bill was returned to the House for Die consideration »f this amendment and was referred to a-special committee. The chairman of tho committee (Air. W. Downie Stewart) stated yesterday that he had been dii'-jctcd to report that the committeo recommended that the House should agra with tho amendment made by the Legislative Council in thn Bill, with 1 the exception of the words "imprisonment for onfo year" in clause 66. The effect of this exception was to make the offence of questioning a legal marriage punishable by fin,; only, jjs far as the Bill was concerned.

Mr. Stewart said the committee recognised that there wer:* wide differences of opinion not merely between denominations, ibut within denominations, regarding the clauso. The committee had indicated its willingness to receive brief statements from parties who had not been heard, and ha hiad communicated this to the heads of the Roman Catholin Church, whose replies would be attached to the printed report wh:?n it' was circulated. Evidence had been taken from the Begistrar-General as to the practit|> of issuing authorisations for marriages that had alreadj\been civilly performed. The committee, considering the clause in tho light of the evidence before it, had rot felt able to accept ..the amended clause proposed by Sir John Findlay on behalf of the Boman Catholic leaders. The committee had considered the advisability of inserting some words that would allay the appi'.ohensions of the denominations as to the effect of the clause upon thedr liberty to teach certain doctrines or to enforce certain _ discipline, and had come to. the conclusion that it was not practicable to insert words that would carry out that object without whittling away the effect of the clause. Tlte committeo finally had agreed to let the'clause stand in the form in which it had been received, with the oniis=ion of the provision for imprisonment. The committee, added Mr. Stewart, had received from the Solicitor-General an opinion that if the .clause becanifl law. a Woman Catholic would still be able to promulgate the doctrine that u, niarriago other than a marriage pelformed by a priest, of the Roman Catholic Church -was not a sacrament, but would be debarred from alleging that persons otherwise married were living in adultery, or that the children ot such marriages were llleKilimnte. The Solicitor-General considered that the eifect of the amendment proposed on behalf of the Roman Catholic leaders would lw to frustrate, tho object of the clause. The committee 1 , added Mr. Stewart, had received evidence that a double marriage had actually taken place in IMS. The parties had been married a second times. If the clause did not work fairly it could be amended in another year. His own feeling was that if it did not prove effective the proper reform would bo the adoption of a civil marriage system. Othor countries hiul already made it a rule that civil marriage was the only marriage recognised by the State. The parties were then free to have a subsequent religious ceremony performed in any way they chose. -rb en n< ? nlan need be in doubt as to whether lie was married or not. Mr. Stewart mentioned that although the members of me committee had. not been in agreement, thefv had discussed the matter withjraV bigotry or intolerance. He moved that the report should lie on. the table and be printed.

Th-3 Civil Remedy. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Wilford) said he proposed to make Ms own opinion quite clear. The statutes Revision Committee ot the Council had heard evidence from one man, Mr. ard Elliott, and had then added tho clause under discussion. Subsequently, evidence was heard from other Pni'tics. The clauso was the last echo of the unfortunate sectarian issuo that i.'Kt been raised at the last general election. Its author was really the organiser ot the Political Protestant Association. Members: Nothing of the sort. Mr. Wilford said that the existing law gave the right of action for damaces to ahy woman whose chastity was impugned. ' The criminal law gave further protection, and there was no question nt all that any person who imputed unchnstitjf to a woman who was legally married could be sent to prison foi a 1 i<rm of venrs\ The committee had not really changed the effect of the claw by cutting out the reference to imprisonment, since under the Justices ot the Peace Act the alternative, to tho payment of the fine was imprisonment. Sir Wilford proceeded to urge that it was the duty of the House to cherish religious tolerance and to discountenance bigotry in any form. Every leader of the eiiurcli to which lie-belonged was opposed to the clause. England hiid never found it necessary to adopt any provision of the kind now proposed. The leading Anglicans throughout the JJominion had.objected to the clause. The Wellin"ton Synod had passed a stronglyworded motion asking that the clauso should not proceed. The amendment was regarded by church leaders as a restriction of religious liberty. The members of ttie New Zealand Parliament were being asked not to perpetuate religious differences. If they passed, the clause tliev would be starting a religious fight. ■ He was definitely and decisively opposed to the clause. The Minister of Justice (Hon. E. P. Lee) agreed that a man or a woman who was slandered had a remedy at law. But that, fact seemed to have very little to do with the clause under discussion. If the clause was merely a duplication, there would be no harm in it. The clause provided simply that .when people were legally married, no. person should state that tho marriage was not legal and sufficient that tho children of the marriage wire illegitimate. There was only one system of legal marriage in New Zealand. That was <i marriage under the Marriage Act. The clause provided that nobody must challenge the validity and sufficiency of the marriage. People who opposed tho clauso were saying in effect that legal marriages could be questioned. Mr. Lee argued that-the clause did not strike atony religious denomination -.ind that it was in file interests of pence, harmony and justice. . The clause would not prevent any person saying: "So-and-so is civilly married, but the doctrine of our church requires'that there shall be a religious marriage." A Labour Vlow. Mr H. E. Holland (Duller) attacked Mr. "Howard Elliott, and accnsed the P.P.A. organiser of having made false statements against the Labour _ Party. It was at the request of Mr. Elliott, he said, that Parliament was being asked to divide tho people of New Zealand on a sectarian issue. Parliament should not have been asked to deal with such a matter. Mr. Holland said ho stood for civil marriage, but he was not going to say to any church that it. could not have its own doctrine. If the Bill passed, Archbishop O'Shea would bo found constitnliiig the Roman Catholic Church a council of action, with the backing of the Anglican Clin.rcli. TJio heads of the churches would have to be gaoled.

The Prime Minister, Tlio Prime Minister (.Mr. Massey) said he had been a member of the committee, but he liarf not been able to attend all its meetings. There were far more serious causes for sectarian bitterness than 'anything in the Bill. Nothing he had ever heard in Parliament was uioro likely to stir up bitterness thaji

the speech that had just bewi made. Mr. Massey slated that he himself was al'resiiyterian, the descendant of a family that had been huulcd out of Scotland on religious ground:, and had settled in the North of Ireland. It waa true that it deputation representing tho I'.P.A.' had seen him early in the session or just before tho session, hut tho marriage law had not been mentioned. He had also wet deputations of Human Catholics.. lie was prepared to see any deputation, when lie had time, and there was never any backdoor business about it. He remembered that the PJ?.A. deputation had talked about the cost of Jiving. The other subjects mentioned lift could not rceollect. but the marriage law had not been included. He could say positively for his church that whim a marriage was properly celebrated by any authorised person, it, was regarded by Presbyterians a.s a good marriage, lie had at landed one meeling of tho committee, and hod been very glad to nouice that its members were on i'riondly ternw. He induced sonik ftoman C'athoiics among his friends, and he knew that they did not all agree with thn opposition to tho clause, Every man was entitled to his own religious conviction* wivhemt interference or intolerance. Mr. Masscy proceedod to deny tliat the claum was an echo of the last general election. Ho had not heard a word about thu mutter during the election, -mfl he hoped that no inch issue would be raised at any future election. It was true, as tin; Leader of the Opposition hud said, that a woman whose marriage was iiupugimd had a legal remedy. But the clauso was required to meet other difficulties Very »iave hardship indeed was caused in cases where the validity of a marriage wis challenged, possibly after the birth of children. He would not have any hesitation about supporting a system of civil marriage if* it was required to get over the difficulty. Thon people who wanted a religious marriage in addition would be at liberty to have it. Mr. Massey added that the clause did not raise a party issue, but. he felt that' his duty was to support 'it in order that injustice might bo prevented and legal marriages protected.

Personal Attacks. The Bill might well be called the "Howard Elliott Justification Bill/' said Mr. H. M'Callum (Wairau), who suggested that the measure should go to the Statutes .Revision Committee. The clause under discussion ought to be in the Crimes Act. Mr. M'Cullum at- - tacked Mr. Elliott in strong terms, stating that his machinations had been directed against the party led by Sir Joseph Ward. He described the P.l'.A. organiser as "a public mischief-maker and stirrer up of strife, and a disgrace to a highly-respectable denomination." Mr. E, A. Wright (Wellington Suburbs) objected to members making use of tho privilege of the House to utter slanderous statements about a person who could not reply. The difficulty that had arisen was not covered by the laws that Mr. Wilford had mentioned. There was 110 penalty in ■ tho present law for person who told a woman, without any third-party being present, that her marriage was not legnl, and that her children were not legitimate. Tt was not possible' to yield the indivi' dual complete liberty' gn quostions of marriage. The Mormons, for example, could not be allowed to advocate- polygamy, even' if they believed it te> bo a proper thing. The point was simply that the kw. of thq land regarding marriage must be recognised by all citizens. The report of the committeo was "talked out." EFFECT OF THE AMENDMENT. SOLICITOR-GENERAL'S OPINION.

The Solicitor-General (Mr. W. C. Macgregor) giving his opinion on the new clause added to the Marriage Amendment Bill in tho Legislative Council, stated; "If the new clause becomes law in its present form, the Soman Catholic Church will etill be at liberty to promulgate its doctrine that the .marriage of. 'a, Catholic celebrated otherwi?e than before a priest of the Catholic Church is not a sacrament. But th.nt Church will be debarred from promulgating declarations that, a sacramental celebration is essential to the validity of a marriage, or that marriages entered into without such a wicramcnfal celebration are in any respect invalid as marriages; and wlill be also debarred from alleging that persons so married are living together in adultery, .or that their issue is illegitimate. In my opinion that is the effect of the new clause, and I see no reason to believe that a Court of law would interpret it otherwise."

In regard to the joint opinion by Sir John Findlav and Mr. Myers forwarded by Archbishop O'Khea. the . SolicitorGeneral expressed the following opinion: "The effect■ of the amendments suggnted bv the two counsel who linvp advised the Archbishop would, in my judgment, be to frustrate the object of the proposed legislation aa embodied in .the nejv clause above referred to."

SHIPPING SPACE COMPLAINT OF PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. A cablegram from the London agents of the Nelson freezing Works was mentioned in the House of Representatives bv Mr. Atmore (Nelson), The message read: "Advi?" clients make strong protest., your Government against prefeential treatment Vesteys with regard freight. . Contract signed to lift 20(H) ' tons free meat at their convenisn:e. Other nrrangopients re free meat not yet decided. Possible there will bo no facilities until all Government meat lifted. 'Considor that urgent demand should be made at once for at least 25 per cent, space all Government shipping in order tn counteract monopoly of Vesteys." •?he Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Nosworth.v) said that ho had no information on the subject and as far as he knew the Government had nothing to do with the lifting of the Imperial meat. Ho would niake, inquiries. RAILWAY 7 SLIPS CONSTANT SUPERVISION NECESSARY. The advisability of increasing the staff of permanent -wily men on the railway lines -where slips_ are linble to occur was urged on the Prime Minister in a Question which, Mr. M. J. Savage (Auckland West) asked him in the House of Representatives Yesterday afternoon. Tliose who had been- travelling on the North Island lines recently, he raid, realifed the danger from the slips, particularly on the Main Trunk line, and knew how necessary it was to have constant supervision.

Mr. 11-isey said that it was quite evident that constant supervision was necessary. He would consult the General Manager on the point which had been raised,

NO DEFENCE BILL

TRAINING SYSTEM UNDER CON

SIDERATION.. Tt was explained by the Minister of Defence in the House yesterday afternoon, in reply to a question asked by Mr. J. M'C. Dickson (Chalmers) that there was no intention of introducing a Bill this session dealing with the defence system. Mr. Dickson asked if the Bill was to be introduced, nnd if so would it deal with the term of Territorial training. Sir Heaton Rhodes said that it was not necessary to have legislat'on to alter the svstem of training. . The Minister had full power to do it himself, A scheme, had been referred to a select oommittee, which would be reporting coon The House would then have mi opportunity of discussing the mattor.

FOREST RESERVES

THE 'DEMARCATION OF LANDS. The desirability of separating fomt land from pastoral land as quickly in possible was urged in the House by Mr. irawken (Eginont), who said that much mixed land was now being'held untloi forest reservation. The Ministor of Lands (Mr. Guthriej replied that forest areas throughout NewZealand were being placed Under provisional reservation. I'lie demarcation of all the land was not possible at present, owing to lack of staff, bi(t the Lands lJcpartment had the right to take back any land that was found to be rfitablo (or settlement purposes,