MARRIAGE AMENDMENT BILL

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 35, 5 November 1920, Page 8

MARRIAGE AMENDMENT BILL

VALIDITY OF MARRIAGES

FURTHER DEBATE IN THE HOUSE

ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PRODUCED The debate on tho Marriage Amendment Bill was resumed in the House of Representatives ye-;tvrday afternoon. The Bill had Ix'on referred to a special coniinitteo. which recommended that the new clause added by the Legislative Council, relating to the validity of marriages, 6hrouUi be accepted by the House. The report of this committee had been "talked out" on October 2S.

Jlr. It. A. Wright (Wellington Suburbs) denied that the clause relating to "double marriage-)" had been framed before cvidrncr was taken by a committee ol the Legislative Council. Tliq clause had boon drafted after all the evidence '■Hid been heard by the committee. All tin- p.:!'ties to tho affair had been notiKcd that they could give evidence. Mr. Wright regretted that personal attacks had been made on the Rev. Howard Elliott in the course of the debate. The member for Wairau, for example, had said Unit tho P.P.A. organiser was "a parasite." Mi. MX'allum (Wairau): A paid para<site.

Mr. Wright assured tho House that Mr. Elliott had conducted his case in a most able, manner. Ho had stood up against very able lawyers, and, almost single-handed, had convinced the committee tlint he was in the right. The opponents of the clause were simply trying to bolster up a bad case by abusing the other side. It had been stated absurdly that Mr. Elliott was an agent of vested interests, engaged in dividing the workers. The clause obviously was just as like.lv to divide employers as workers. Interjections had been frequent, and the Speaker, at this stage, asked that the debate should be conducted without heat, ami that members who had tho floor should not bo interrupted. Mr. Wright proceeded to say that every Church should bo allowed to mako its own rules within the law of the land. Hut 'Hie No Teinore decree, by declaring that legal marriages were not legal, was an interference with the law of the land. The question, then, was wliioli authority should rule, the State or the Church? He believed that the State should rule. The State could not be denied the right to frame and enforce a sound marriage law. The right of a Church to override.civil law could not be conceded, aior could tho State admit an 1111liivitrfl rielit of conscience to the individual if interference with'the civil rights of other people was involved. .Mr. Wright'added that in Wellington within the last week a Roman Catholic man; married to an Anglican woman, had declared that tho marriage had never been a good one, and that his five children were bastards. AVhat could the opponents of the clause say to such an incident? To concedo the right of any church to impugn legal marriages would be to produce chaos. Another point of view was presented by Mr. L. M. Isitt (Christchurch North). The clause, ho said, savoured to him of the bad old days of tho Test Act. It had been condemned by every church. He felt that the timo was particularly inopportune for the introduction of such a clause, since New Zealand contained something like 150,000 Irish Catholics, whoso loyalty was being subjected to <a strain at the present time. An Irish republic was an utterly impossible enterprise, and the Sinn "Fein rebellion was a Jamentable incident. But the Irish Catholics, seeing what was happening in Ireland, could not be expected to be in a normal emotional condition. _ The clause would be'-justified only by dire need. . It was, to say the hast, most unfortunate in its origin. It was the result of the association of the Government with a bitter religious faction, and was undeniably aimed directly at the Roman Catholic Church. .No proof of need for the clause had been produced. All the arguments m its support had been produced by. the representative of a faction: The authorities of the Roman Catholic Church, said Mr. Isitt, were prepared to promise the Government that the ills described by the opponents of that church would not arise. _ The assurance would justify the rejection of the clause to any person who was not blinded by religious bitterness. At least the clause could bo withheld until the evil had actually arisen. Mr. Isitt proceeded to say that tho House had a perfect right to say that no person should question the legal validity of a civil marriage. But. the clause went beyond that. It. struck nt freedom .of religious thought and freedom r.«- jnnfph. 11/, f'p]t that it was not the province of Parliament to interfere with the religious beliefs of the people. He intended even at this late hour 10 move that the mattei; be referred back" to the committee for further consideratinr

Mr. V. H. Potter (Roskill) stated that the authority of' tho State in New Zealand was beim' challenged by ."an Italian priest." There was not tlw least doubt that the Roman Catholic Church was denying the legality- of marrincps celebrated according to civil law. He quoted a • Catholic Bishop's description .of such a mnrriage as "legalised concubinage." fjitholirs were lold in documents that had been produced thnt n marriage between a Roman Catholic: nnd a Protestant outside the Catholic Church iUOiJiot a marriage at all, and that tho children of suqli a marrinso were illegitimate. The "Ne Temere" decree wns an insult to the law of New Zealand, and it was causing misery and breaking up homes. in New Zealand. The Bill wns required to protect the civil nnd religious liberty, of the people of this country.. Mr. Howard" Elliott had been attacked bv the leader of the Labour Party The real reason for that, "was that he had helped to thwart tho Labour oxtrenlllts by .preaching lovalt.v nnd adherence to constitutional law.. Mr. Potter proceeded to auote, without names, illustrations of the operation, of the "Ne Temere" decree. He said that a Roman Catholic woman, married bv a registrar to a Protestant, had Riven birth to a child. She had been visited afterwards bv Archbishop O'Shea. who had said: "To me it is a pity'you werp not struck de.aJ ,'fSstead of jrivinir birth to a child." A couiJlo had been married by the Rev Dr. Gibb in ' St. John's Church. Wellington.- in 1919. The \vife wns subjected to cruel neclect and treated with harshness owine to her refusal to to be married by a priest. A lettei received by her mother Septemhe* 22 last coiiin.ined these words: ".lack and I wore niarriod by the priest, and everything now is all right." Mr. Potter quoted also a letter nirporting to liavo been written bv a Catholic pi'le~st'to his sister, reproving her for not atteiul'ng the Catholic Church, and adding: "If you nre determined to get married, 1 ank vou in the name of Almighty God to gel married before a pi'iost, for ns voo know well, a Catholic going through a marriage ceremony before a non-Catholic minister is not married at all. Tho Person would be livinjc in continual sin." Dr. H. T. J. Thackor (Christclmrch North) complimented Mr. Isitt upon his speech. The member for Wellington Suburbs had unnecessarily "put himself off-side." The gentleman in question was really not a bigot bv nature. It had been said that the matter before tho House was not a party mntter. but upon the committee thero lind been'seven Reformers, three Liberals nnd one Labour member, 6o that tho Government had been assured of the majority necessary to push the Bill on as far as it hod gone. Dr. Thacker plaoed on record a statement of tho Catholic attitudo-to-wards civil marriage. He said ho despised tho man who had Taised tho present controversy. Too much importance had been atiaclicd to what, that gentleman said. It was a pity that such a holy tiling as religion and the sanctity of inarriago should be "bandied abgut on the tloor of the House." Mr. A. Hnrris (Waileniata) said thnt the No Temere Decree did affect nonCatholics as well as Catholics, whatever was alleged to tho oontrnvy In tho statement that Dr. Thacker had rend. There was 'in the amendment under discussion ijo interference with tho religious teachings of any Church. In support of this

assertion, Mr. Harris quoted the opinion of the Solicitor-Genera!. Religious convictioji should be respected, lie continued. But that was no reason Tor failing to ensure the supremacy of the .civil law over «nv ecclesiastical law that might be promulgated. Surely there wns nothing to object to in tho amendment. Would not Parliament bo failing in its duty if it permitted anyone to say that a man and a woman married uccordinjj to the law of tho country «;ere not truly and sufficiently married, Dint their union wn* concubinuge, and their offspring illegitimate? Mr. S. G. Smith (Taranaki) told the House that ho was an Anglican ' by accident of birth and subsequently by inclinatfon." He stood for religious toleranco and religious liberty, and he thought the clause had been justly described as an attempt to justify the agitation conducted by Mr. Howard Elliott. No public demand had been made for the legislation. The demand had come from a particular organisation. He saw no reason why Protestants should not haV|> an organisation, but lie wished they had appointed a more suitable organiser. Mr. Smith proceeded to quote a statement by Mr. Howard Elliott that-his organisation had kept the Liberals out of powj-r at the last general election. Another statement made by tho P.P.A. organiser was that the Government had been about to make an appointment to one of ' the most important offices of the State, but had desisted because tho appointment would bo resented by tho I'.P.A. That statement surely could not ibe true. Mr. Massey: It would be t a matter for the Public Service Commissioner.

Mr. fimith quoted a statement that tho member for Wellington North had been supported at the general election by the P.P.A. Mr. Luke objected to this statement. He denied absolutely that ho had ever had anything to do with the organisation.. He asked for a withdrawal. Mr. Smith, at the instruction of the Speaker, withdrew the quot'.d statement. He proceeded to deprecate the perpetuation of religious bitterness. The people were told that the Legislative Council was a check on hasty legislation, but in this case at any ratfe it was forcing hasty legislation upon tho country. Mr. W. A. Veitch (Wanganui) said ho thought there was need for some action regarding tho .Roman Catholic marriage doctrine. This notd appeared .to be recognised by the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church, since they had made a move, before the Bill appeared, towards a re-drafting of their ca:ecnism. The Bill, which was iggressive in tone and likely to create ri>ligiou6 bitterness, was not tho best method of dealing with the matter. A much better course would b« to give timo for quiet discussion and negotiation. The Bill was 'being rushed upon the country. The Ne Tetnero decree had been in operation for very many years, while th,o drastic legislation nowproposed had been evolved in a few weeks. Hu was in favour of postponing consideration of the problem until , next session.

Mr,a W. I'. Jennings (Waitomo) declared that he would support the amendment. An attack was being madje upon tho Church to which he belonged. Tjua attnek was not a new thing. Th« Roman Catholic Church had been assailed unfairly and unjustly for very many years, and the Bill was merely a new form of the old sectarian issue. The authorities of the Roman Catholic Church had 6tated their willingness to make alterations in some of the writings used by the Church. That undertaking was endorsed by tho laity of thfc Church, lie hoped sincerely that the nTehibers of the Houso would take a calm and just view of tliie position and not promote sectarian bitterness. Ha appealed to the Prime Minister to bo generous and tolerant.

Mr. M. J. Savage (Auckland Wiest) thought it regrettable that r,uch a proposal had come before tho House, 110 had been a member of the coinmitlve, but ho dissociated himself from its findings. Mr. Savage proceeded to refer to the Auckland Post Offieo inquiry, and suggested that Mr. Howard Elliott was not'a credible witness. He was quoting some statements with a very personal flavour when the Speaker ruled that this matter was outside the scope of the Bill. The momber made a plea for religious tolerance.

Mr. P. Eraser (Wellington Central) assured tho House that lie was without anyl.caning towards one religious wet or another. The only thing that could place all beyond tho suspicion of persecuting others was to provide that civil marriage should bo compulsory for all, and that the contracting parties, if tliey so desired., might afterwards have the religious ceremony, or the sacrament, as they might deem it, performed in their owii way. Surely the lessons of the past ten centuries hi\d served _to emphasise the importance of toleration: yet here, was an attemp*. to single out n section of the community for what amounted to nothing les.s- than persecution. It was clear that the Catholic Church was quite prepared to do nil in its power, without surrendering its, doctrine, to remove any c.nse of offence in its doctrine of marriage Mr. "Wright (Wellington Suburbs), speaking to the amendment, said that lie conceded complete religious freedom to all denominations. But he believed the State had a right to insist on the sanctity c: legal mariinge. He believed that the penalty under the clause, in the case of a clergyman or priest, ought to I>2 not fine or imprisonment, but removal from the register of those entitled to eoknijiise marriage. • "The bigots are not confined to any one Church," said Mr. IT. Atmore (Nelson). who described the Bill as "a descent into the muck and mud of religious bigotry." The people of New Zealand ought to he concentrating on repairing the ravages of war, hut instead they were being asked to revive old sectarian quarrels. A man's religion was largely an accident of birth, since the child talk the faith of the parent?, and it was not in the interests of any section of the community, that issues such as tho Bill liaised should be raised for all. So Ion" as tho Roman Catholics recognised the" validitv of civil marriage, under the laws of Hie country, the State had no more right to question the form of tho Catholic's religious marriage ceremony than it had to interfere with Masonic rin.al.

Mr. F. N. Bartram (Grey Lynn) thought that the time of Parliament was being wasted in religous wrangles. Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) supported' tho Bill.

"The I?ev. Howard Elliott is a paid political agent working for the lieform Party," declared Mr. It. Masters-(Strat-ford). Though the marriage question was exercising the mind of Parliament, it did not seem to him to be exercising the minds of the public outside. He had not received from his electorate a single communication regarding the Bill. He regretted that the legislation had been brought down, because he believed it was going to cause strife. He supported the amendment moved by Mr. Isitt.

Mr. J. R. Hamilton (Awarua) commended the Government for its imposed amendment of the innTfrnge laws, 110 did not believe that that amendmout would unjustly affect anyone. Mr. J, M'Combs (Lvttelton) compared with the Ne. Temere Decree-certain passages in the Westminster Confession of Faith, and claimed that the publication in pamphlet form of the passages quoted would render those responsible for the publication liable under the clause. .Mr. Massey should at this time forget that he had been tho master of an Orange lodge, nnd should remember that ho v as tho Prime Minister, with heavy responsibilities to the wholo people. Mr. M'Combs suggested that the Bill wns tho Reform Party's payment to (he P.P. A. for assistance given in the last election.

The Primo Minister, speaking aftor H p.m., said that'if there was one mnn in the House who had stirred up sectnriun and class bitterness, it was the member for Lyttolton, who had just spoken. The member had said that the Bill hud been introduced lo repay the Protestant Political Association for help Riven to the Reform Party at tlio general election. J Mr. M'Combs: Tlint is absolutely true. Mr. Massey: I give that the most emphatic contradiction I can possibly ffivo it. 1 only regret that the forms of 1 Uo House do not allow me to say what 1 should liko to say about the statement and the member made it. I do not pretend lo 1)0 perfect, but my lifo is an open book, and I am not ashamed of any leaf of that book Ijeing turned and exposed to the public view. Can tho honourable member snv thnt.P Mr. M'Combs: Yes, undoubtedly. Mr. Massey: "J am glad to hear it." The Prime Minister, proceeding, saM it was quite true that nt one lime in hie

life, many years ago, ho had teen itembcr and master of an Orange lodge, 110 had heard in the House that day speeches in opposition to the Bill being delivered by men who were members of the Orange order. Ho was also d Mason and office-bearer in a very important lodge. He was a member o) the Order of Oddfellows. If members wished to know anything more nbout him he was prepared to give them the information.' He was not a member of the P.P.A. and had never attended a meeting of that organisation. Bo re membered that at the general eleilion the P.P.A. had been a very vigorous opponent of Sir James Allen. An or ganisation that would -attack the "second in command" of the Iteform Party in this way could not be regarded as a very good friend of the party. Turning to The Bill, Mr. Massey said that the measure had been j-asied by the Huuse of Representatives in n noucontroversial form, and sent to the Legislative Council. Ho did not think that lie had read the Bill until it readied the Council. Then certain persons gavo evidence before the Statutes Kevisiou Committee of the Council, and that committee added the clause that was under discussion. ' The Bill, as ainefoded, was returned to the House in the ordinary way. He then considered the Bill with the Minister of Justice and they decided that it had better be referred to a special committee of the House. . The 1 committee . was selected very carefully, both sides being represented, and no one of very stronc bias being included. Ho attended only one moeting of the committee for a short time. The commit-' tee had amended the clause by striking out the reference to imprisonment and had returned it to the House. His plain duty, as Leader of the House was to «ee that the members had an opportunity to vote on the Bill. He had not used any personal or party influence for or against tho Council's amendment. Iho members of his party Were free to vote : exactly as they pleased. Ihe Prime Minister added that he hopca the discussion was not going to !•>«•« sectarian bitterness behind it. Nobody .bated sectarian bitterness more than he did, and he very much regretted the note that had been imported into the debate. The House divided on Mr. lsitts amendment at. I.ITO a.m. The amendment! was defeated by 44 votes to 25. OUTSIDE~COMPETITION AT LOCAL' WOOL SALES. Mr G. Hunter (Waipawa) yesterday reminded tho Prime Minister tiliat earlier in the session he had asked the Government whether it would take the steps necessary to induce outside buyers to attend the local wool sales. He particularly asked that such steps should be taken in regard to both America and Japan. Outside, competition would make a verv material difference in the price realised locally. Mr. Massey replied that steps were being taken in the direction indicated. W tho vnember. The member would recollect that some months ago a committco representing the producers had been set up in Wellington to deliberate in conjunction with the Board of Agriculture. He would take the opportunity of finding out what had been done to give effect to the wish expressed by Mr. Hunter. ALLEGATIONSIFceOK ISLAND TRADERS ' NO COMMISSION OP INQUIRY. A question regarding the Cook Islands was yesterday morning asked of the Hon. Dr. Pomare' in the House. Mr. J. A. Young (W.aikato) inquired what steps, if any,. the Government had taken to set up a commission or other competent indicia! body to investigate allegations made by planters, traders, an<i other Europeans at Earotonga to tho New Zealand Parliamentary party. The Minister replied that the Government had no intention of appointing u commission to inquire into tho allegations referred to. 1 DURATION OF THE SESSION , NO ENDING THIS WEEK. Speaking in the House of Representatives late last night, while the Marriage Amendment Bill was under discussion, the Prime Minister said that members had missed- their chance of ending the session this week. It would not bo possible now to complete the remaining work by Saturday night. He did not care if the House sat for another week. He was not going to rush the business. Mr. Massey added that, as far as he was able to judge, there would be 6imo legislation introduced before the end of the session that had not been tncught of a few days ago. ■ IMMIGRATION OF EX-SERVICE MEN Mr. P. Frasnr (Wellington Uentral).yesterdoy asked the Minister of Immigration whether his attention had been 1 drawn to a published cable report that os-ser-vice men who went out to the Dominions had expressed n- good deal of dissatisfaction with the lack of arrangements for their reception. Had the Minister received from such men any complaint that they were not met upon arrival in this country, or that accommodation and employment were not provided for them? The Hon. W. Nosworthy, in reply, said that th,; report referred" to had not come under his notice. He assured the member that in every case overseas people coming to New Zealand had been found food and accorinnidatiou, and he knew of no case in which it could be said that the Government of this country had not done its utmost for the newcomers. MUNICIPAL ENDOWMENTS An amendment to the Municipal Corporations Bill, introduced in, the House of Representatives yesterday by ViceRegal Menage, gives authority to boroughs to raise money for the improvement of endowment lands.' The Minister of Internal .Affairs (Hon. G. J. Anderson) stated that the power was required in order that certain endowments that were not at present producing much revenue might be brought to n profitable state. A case in point was to be found at liivcrcargill, where the council owned some 2000 acres of worked-out bush and l swamp land. The clause was added to tho Bill. THE COST-OF-LIVING BONUS Notice was given by the Hon. Colonel Smith in the Legislative Council last ni"ht of his intention to ask the Government whether it will consider the effect of the recent award increasing the bonus on the industries of tho Dominion, and endeavour to find some way of assisting sjich industries to pay tho bonus and so save numbers of them from having to close down. STONE QUARRIES BILL

The Stone Quarries Amendment Bill, which brings within the provisions of the Act all quarries having a rock-face fifteen feet Irish (without regard to the question whether explosives are used in them or not) was considered bv the. Legislative Council yesterday afternoon. The measure was put through all stages and passed.

The Government has taken power in the Mining Amendment Bill to pay sul>siclies to prospecting parties engaged in searches for mineral oils and natural gas. A clausc added to the Counties Bill yesterday authorises county councils to coutrihu'tn towards the maintenance of war memorials. J