MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE SISTER.

Evening Star, Issue 3323, 14 October 1873, Page 3

MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE SISTER.

(Ahridjed from Hansard.) Mr Waterhouse, in moving the second reading of the above Bib, referred to the increasing majorities which voted for the passage of the Bill through the Lower House. He might say a few words with the view o removing a misapprehension which he foum was very general in the minds of rot onb honorable members, but of the public atlarg' -that was, that by the bill they were seeking to reverse the hj ug-established aw of tin land. It was only to that point he intrude to draw the attention of honorab'e members, for he was pretty well sati-llcd that even honorable gentleman had already made ni his mind as to what vote he would give upon the Bill. It was only recently that thesmarriages had been declared illegal. T'p to 183) they were not illegal in the eye of the law, but were voidable only by the act : on of the Kcclesiastical Courts, taken during th» lifetime of the parties interested. Therefore 'his Bill introduced no change in a longeatablished practice. It simply would reverse a decision arrived at so recently ar 1835. Mr Stokes, who moved tho second reading of the Bill that day six months, qu dp'’ largely the opinions of Lord Hatherley on the subject. The Hon. Colonel Brett said, from the religious and social aspect of the Bill, he did not consider that it would in any way milf tate against the purity and domestic happiness of life, particularly when he took into consideration the wide distinction be tween affinity and ennsaneninity. There wa< no law either sacred or human, agin s" the kind of marriage which the Bill soncht to allow. He challenged any honorable member to quote any portion of Scripture which prohibited such marriages. He saw, by the records of the British Parliament, that twenty-six spiritual poors, including two archbishops, had declared it to be their opinion that there was no spiritual prohibition to those marriages. Then, he ask' d why did they commit such a gross injustice to tho softerjsex, who were in a large majority in numbers over the other sex ? At. present the matrimonial market was deprived o r thousands of widowers, who it was to ho inferred would make good husbands. Ho considered that the law as it stood created a •reat deal of evil, and inflicted great hardships upon those who had already contracted marriages of the description referred to in f.he Bill. He appealed to the Council to do a tardy act of justice to that section of the community by legitimatizing their children and enabling those children to look upon their fellow-creatures without shame ; and moreover to be allowed all and each of the rights of legitimacy. His honorable friend Mr Stokes had quoted a high authority who was opposed to the passing of a measure of a measure of this character. He (Colonel Rrett) held in his Innd the opinion of no less than 200 eminent men in Great Britain and Ireland who supported these marriages very strongly. They included members of all denominations. Even Cardinal Wiseman gave his consent, and also some of the most eminent Presbyterian clergymen. It was well known that the Presbyterians had for a long time been opposed to such marriages being allowed, but they had been gradually adopting the generally entertained opinion in the other direction. He did not see why the Presbyterian should be looked upon as the model religion. That denomination had its faults as well as others. No religion which man had any hand in forming was faultless. Therefore he had not had that respect for the Presbyterian religion which ho otherwise would have had, because portions of its tenets had been dictated by man and not by Cod, His honorable friend Mr Stokes alluded to Germany. This law had been in operation there from time immemorial, and it was a pattern country, and one of the most civilised of nations. He confessed there had been for years some little objection to this law on the part of the Catholics, but dispensation could he obtained from tho Pope, and it is seldom refused. Besides, fas ho said before, he could quote Cardinal Wiseman as being in favor of these marriages. He hoped the Council would not, from any sentimental feeling, be induced to throw out this Bill. In two or three of the neighboring Colonies of Australia, Bills legaliiang those marriages had been passed, and in the British House of Commons the Deceased Wife s Sister Marriage Bill had been passed sixty-one times since the year 1835, and where it had recently carried by a ma jority of ninety-nine. Surely, after the Bill had met with favor from such quarters, they should follow sint, and not for any narrow-minded reasons reject it. He was sure it met with the approval of the people of the Colony. Mr Sewell objected to the Bill, on the ground Chat it was not the law of England. Whenever tho Imperial Parliament thought fit to alter the law in respect to marriage as applicable to Great Britain, it would be time enough fp'if Colony to follpw auiji,

Captain Fraser’s mind revolted against the idea of marriage with a deceased wife’s sister. The Scotch people weie decidedly opposed to it. Wherever the Bill was brought into operation the number of divorces increased, but in Scotland, where for years past a divorce could be had for L2O, there was not a single instance of the Scotch people taking advantage of the law of divorce. If any person in Scotland were to marry his deceased .wife’s sister, he would be hooted and stoned.

Dr Pollen would only be induced to give an affirmative vote for ihe Bill to assimilate the law of the Colony to Imperial legislation on the subject. Mr Holmes said the generally entertained objection to the Bill was shared in by tbe Scotch people of Otago, and he believed of other parts of the Colony, and it was directly opposed to all their ideas of marrirge. Colonel Kenny would vote against the Bill on political, social, and national grounds, Mr Acland hoped the Council would throw out the Bill every time it was brought before them, until the law of England was changed. The Hon Mr Ngatata said what had been spoken about that day was right. Marriage with a deceased wife’s sister was a Maori custom, and had been an old custom amongst his ancestors. When a wife died, a man could marry the sister, who would be able to take care of the children, lest ho should marry a strange woman who would take no care of the children. It is the Maori law. it was the law in times past, and is so up to the present time. He was in that position. His wife died, and ho married her sister, He would vote for the Bill.

The Hon, Mr Mantell was understood to say that he cmld not appreciate the force of the reasons urged against the passing of the Bill, and they were rather sentimental than founded on good sense. He was glad the Hon. Mr Ngatata had the manliness to state his view of the matter, and be thought they ought to pay some deference to customs which had bent observed in the country from time immemorial ; and when they found the institutions of the country more sensible than those they had left behind, they should adopt them. He should support the second reading of the Bill, and hoped he would live to do so until he found himself voting with a majority, in common with the Hon. Colonel Brett ami the Hon. Mr Waterhouse. At present there appeared to be a foregone conclusion against the Bill, The Hon. Mr Scotland hoped that the Council would not hesitate to pass the Bill from any fear of wounding the feelings of the Scotch, for statistics showed that on the score of morality Scotland was notin advance if other countries, 'ihe Bill, he thought, lid not go far enough, and he would wish to ,ve legalised marriage with a deceased bror.ht r’a widow.