MARRIAGE WITH DECEASED WIFE’S SISTER BILL.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5147, 21 September 1877, Page 5

MARRIAGE WITH DECEASED WIFE’S SISTER BILL.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND TIMES. Sir,-—I scarcely think the Archdeacon does justice to those who favor an alteration in the existing marriage law. ■ Pne might reasonably infer from the first part of. his letter that it is sought by the present Bill to change a law existing from time immemorial; but such is not the case. I quote the words of Lord Penzance, who is certainly competent to ! Speak upon such a question. When introducing a similar Bill into the House of Lords in 1871 he said—“ I believe it to be a common impression that we desire to get rid of a legislative restriction that has existed for an almost indefinite period. That is not so. I will remind your lordships that up to 1835 the prohibition of these marriages was canonical only, not civil, and that marriage with a deceased wife’s Sister was recognised by the temporal or King’s Courts of the kingdom. If a man married his deceased wife’s Sister and had a child, it was legitimate, and had the power of inheriting' property. , .The ecclesiastical Court, however, dealt With these marriages, pronouncing them to be null and void, notwithstanding one or, both of the parties might be dead when the suit Was commenced. But in the. time of James I. the Courts of common law interposed and prohibited the spiritual Courts from proceeding to pronounce them null and void after’ the death of one of the parties; hence all these marriages came to be called voidable , marriages, in contradistinction to those that were absolutely' void ; they were not void ah. initio', but voidable only by sentence of separation, and were valid for all civil; purposes, unless the separation was actually made during the lifetime of one of the parties. The law, therefore, stood in this 1 way: that from the time when the marriage took place until a suit was instituted in 1 the ecclesiastical Court, and jiUtil the ecclesiastical Court declared the marriage to be void, these marriages were valid, and that after the ecclesiastical Courts have delivered their decisions, the temporal Courts would respect the decisions ; but if no such proceeding took place during the life time ,of both parties in the' ecclesiastical Court, the. temporal Court treated the marriage as legitimate. We propose, therefore, not a change from a state of things which existed from all time, but the removal of, the law of 1835, which created then, for the first time, the: practical grievance under which we now .suffer.” , (Yide IjCti'iisavd, vol. 205.) From the, above quotation, we can readily see to what extent the'statements of tlie first part of the Archdeacon’s letter are pertinent. That the canon law of 'the Anglican Church, or the decisions of the Westminster Assembly, should be held - to determine the opinion and practice of the community on this matter, is, in my judgment, ! hot to be admitted for ,a moment. 1 . •

In respect to objections to the Bill bn Scriptural grounds,. I have but to say that as ■ long as the authority of superior scholarship, such as is represented by Archbishop Whatcly, Bishop Thirlwall, Dr. Chalmers, Dr. Vaughan, the distinguished Hebraists Drs. Lee and McCaui, and a host of, others, can be quoted against those vriio hold the Ar elide aeon’s ■opinions of the nieaning and binding character of the Levitieal law, the advocates 'of the present change in the law heed’ not doubt but that their position is 'well founded,, even from a Scriptural* point of view. , Add as to the anticipated social evils from such a measure, it has been replied over and over again that wherever these marriages have been recognised—in Germany, in other parts of the Continent of Europe, in America—no such results are perceptible. When the British Parliament repealed the law respecting witch-burning such was denounced as abrogating the Levitieal law, and all kinds of direful consequences were predicted; but the law was repealed, with results just as fatal, I believe, as would attend that of the marriage law under consideration. I trust that the Legislative Council will pass the present Bill, and thus' give effect to the wishes of the people of blew Zealand as expressed by the House of Representatives.— I am, &c., ’ ’ / W. H. West.