DIVORCE DIFFICULTY

Hokitika Guardian, 2 September 1930, Page 7

DIVORCE DIFFICULTY

AMERICAN SAILORS’ WIVES. The Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Amendment Bill, introduced in the House of ltepresentatives by Mr H. G. R. Mason (Auckland Suburbs), has an important clause affecting women who married American sailors while the American fleet was in New Zealand.

Mr Mason Rave instances of New Zealand girls who had married American sailors. The sailors had sailed away, and that had been the end of it. Those girls, as the result of their marriage to citizens of the United States, could not get a divorce in a New Zealand court, in which they had no status, because of their changed nationality. It was desired that such a change of nationality should not be forced upon married women. MENTAL HOSPITAL CASES. Another point covered by the bill dealt with dithroe following separation. Under the present law it was possible to proceed on separation by agreement in New Zealand or by an order of the Court in New Zealand, but while it was posisble to act on an agreement for separation made outside New Zealand, it was not possible to act on an order of a Court outside New Zealand. The bill sought to remedy this anomaly. It would also reduce the period from seven to four years for which it was necessary that one party must be confined in a men. tal hospital before a divorce could be granted,

The Hon J, G, Cobbe stated that advice placed at the disposal of the Gvernmt-nt indicated it was necessary that the bill should be considerably amended before it would be passed. Tt was pointed out if a girl married in New Zealand were granted a divorce her husband, if a. resident, say of England, would be guilty of bigamy if he married again in England, where the divorce would not be recognised. At the same time, if the wife were granted a divorce in New Zealand arid she went to a country to which her husband belonged, and remarried there, she too would be guilty of bigamy. ,

Mr W. T). Lysnar (Gisborne) said the question seemed to be one for the Imperial Conference. He was opposed to the clause relating, to the confinement ,in mental hospitals. The period should not be cut down. There were possibly cases in which a wife was responsible for her hqs&and’s confinement in a mental hospital, , or vice versa, and in such instances divorce should not be made easy. “GO TO AMERICA.” Mr W. E. Parry (Auckland Central), urged that the State should endeavour to get the young women mentioned by Mr Mason out of their difficulty.

Mr R. A. Wright (Wellington Sub* urbs) submitted that the only effective method would be for the girls to

go to America for a. divorce. If they wished to marry again, they would surely want a divorce that would he recognised everywhere. Mr Mason, in reply, said the girls concerned were likely to live the remainder of their lives in New Zealand. The difficulty under which they were now living was a present one, and it was more important they should be freed from it than from some very remote possibility. The same complications as Mr Cobbe outlined existed in the cases of certain divorces already granted under the Act. The hill was set down for committal next sitting day.