UNFIT MARRIAGES

Southland Times, Issue 18840, 5 June 1920, Page 6

UNFIT MARRIAGES

MR JUSTICE DARLING’S PRONOUNCEMENT. A PERIL TO THE STATE. LONDON, March 25. During the hearing of an action for breach of promise, Mr Justice Darling made a remarkable pronouncement on unfit marriages and what he said should receive the attention of all interested in social reform.

lire case was one in which an ex-soldier defendant pleaded that, owing to the effect of a wound, he was unfit to marry and the Judge agreed with the defence, awarding one farthing damages, without costs. He declared that it should be an implied term when a couple proposed to marry that they should be able to do so without danger to their lives or of having idiot children.

‘‘A great many people now,” said the Judge, “regard marriage as a mere trifle and bigamy as only a little more serious. I do not take that view. Marriage in this country is still normally for the lives of the two parties. Of course, I know that is not always the case, because of the existence of another department in this building— (laughter)and even a contract for a year is sometimes as much as it is good for. (Laughter). However that may be, marriage is a very serious undertaking and even if the law is altered it will remain a serious undertaking because it generally results in the birth of children, do what the law will.

“These children ought to be considered by the law ami by the State, even before they are bora.” A marriage of this kind would probably result in the birth of children who would be practically useless and a burden upon the State. If the plaintiff had been a sensible woman she would have said that the young man decided upon the best thing in refusing to marry, because if she had married him her life would have been a continual misery. He (continued the Judge) did not find that marriage would have endangered the defendant’s life, but he thought his children would have been wretched, and possibly, as time went by, a danger to the State. “Day by day,” continued Mr Justice Darling, “one sees this sort of thing. Directly they commit a crime the nature of their parents is immediately laid before tile jury and the jury are asked to say that, they are not responsible for their actions. If marriages of this kind are to bo encouraged, I cannot help thinking there will Ire more of these people than there are now and already, in my judgment, there are quite enough.” He did not find that the defendant was sufficiently ill to justify his refusal to marry, nor did he think the plaintiff agreed to release him from performing his promise to many. Therefore, he had to consider what damage the plaintiff had suffered. The defendant was not a man who had made a fortune out of the war. All he got out of it was to be wounded in all parts of his body ami he had for two and a-half years been in hospital after hospital. Therefore, tlre conclusion the Judge came to was thar. the plaintiff had lost nothing of any value at all and that she was very well out of it.

‘T do not think,” his Lordship said, “that it was to this woman’s private advantage nor to the public advantage, that this action should have been brought and I think (hat, in the public interest, such actions ought to be discouraged.” During the hearing of the case counsel for the defence contended that his client was justified in refusing to marry by good sense, good law and good morals. Counsel for the plaintiff replied (hat it might as well be argued that a highly-strung poet should be deprived of marriage because he might pass on his nervous temperament to his children. — (Laughter).

The .fudge: Do poets beget poets? (Laughter). Counsel: I do not know that. But they might puss on a highly-strung disposition. 'the Judge: I sQppose a good poet begets a worse poet, and lie begets still a worse one. until at last, in the sixth degree, you get. liie modern poet. — (Laughterl. Mr Warren (for (he. plaintiff) said.it might also be said that a conscientious objector should not be allowed to marry, because he would create conscientious object ors.

The Judge: If applied to politics I should think it would be said that, nobody ought to marry who did not belong to the Coalition. — (Laughter). Mr Warren: That I should assent to, as it would lead to propagation of a race of immoral people.— (Laughter).