CORRESPONDENCE.

Hokitika Guardian, 2 December 1921, Page 1

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE DIYOIU E LAW. (To the Editor). Rir. ■ \Ve, the mid, rsigned, luo. c 11 requested to join with others thioughoiti the Dominion in petitioning P"iiiaaa iii to repeal Section 1 e.t the Mari',age Amendment Act, 1 D-t). 'I lie Prime Minister lias expressed the opinion that some amendment is nuces,iirv to the legislation of lasi session. There may he Bill crem es of view as to ivhaL section might he repealed, hut we believe that the gieat majority of our feilo"-citizens "ill lie ot opinion that .'-Vetid'll I of the Amending Act goes heyond the sound judgment that has iit lierto elmfactorised the Marriage l.ogislal ion nl this Oomitiiuii.

Without entering into controversial matters tie* terms ot the Section ref, rred to will lie found in the potiHmi appended to this letter, which tlte citizens lav,Hit able tfiercto are asked to

Sl>£M. I |’,v insert iny: tlnse. y«nii will greatly j faeilitat * tin. \» nr’i of tile ladies wlin j

are making a lions* to hipiisc visitation j for purpose* r| nlit :i iniu<' ur«’s to the petition. \ careful rending he- I I'liiehaml of the petition in your col- 1 minis "ill enable all interested to came to :: e-lieliision as Uicirthtt v in the matter prior to the edit of the ladies and "iff save mm h lime and perliai s confusion. We are. Rir. etc . P. R. FII.ARF.IL A. C. PUR UH A R .T. F. .1 AC 1 ' The oetiticn is as follows: 1 To the 1 finiourahle the Speaker and Member* of the Mouse d Representatives in Parliament A s seinhled. i The Petition of the undersigned I'lectors of the Dominion of New Zealand sheweth : 1. That with a view 1o the maintenance of a high standing of tamily life, an nmemhimnl cf tlm 1 w in regard t<> divorce is imperatively needed. 11 That in particular it is urgent that sleet ice 1 1 “The l)ivnr f, e and Alatri- \ ".initial Causes Amendment Act. 1020” h- fori!iwith reie.ilcl. for the following reasons:— I fa) That the discretion given hv that Section to the- Court in regard to granting, a decree of Divorie. is. ■ oeeordiim to Hi" iiidenmnl ef Hie Court: of .Anneal in the case of Mason v. Mason, almost ciit'relv illusory. (h) That a husband rr wife guilt v nf a serious matrimonial off 'itce, even of adultery, is not l-,v reason of siieli offene • debarred from obtaining a decree of di'-oree | against t!>e iniiecent parfv to the j marrim'e. a iirnrisinn 'hat -eems ! to vnnr petitioners to strib" at I the verv root, of inst ire. (:■) That it is against Hm vrin-i’ les i nf Fncrltcti taiv that a nn’tv ( •■ho'ild "Ic’d his own won.i-do- '* i>", as .. e d for claiming vic'htc :v • * r • * i"sf a nartv innoee”t of .. eon ' (’• -M d 0..!;,,,, (tin 1n,.«1r ef H.o /,b 11... be -V" i»,.< ie»"| lOC n»i\’ m rrj'O f'T senaratinn hv their ra'amts. are •>«ti" "!v. disregarded.