THE BIGAMY LAW.

Taranaki Daily News, 11 July 1919, Page 5

THE BIGAMY LAW.

CONSIDERED BY THE FULL COURT. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, July 10. The Full Court is hearing Rex. v. Jackson, which the present position of the bigamy law in New Zealand. The Chief Justice decided that ,the whole kw was bad and the question now before the Appeal Court is whether the whole law is bad, or only that part dealing with bigamy ou,tside New Zea« land.

The Solicitor-General argues that, though there can be no question of severability in the case of an Imperial statute, yet in a statute of a subordinate legislature a section of the Act might bo divisible, provided both in form and substance the section was capable of severability Decision was reserved.

Sir Jqjro Findlay submitted that in the Lenders case the Oourt of Appeal had decided that the whole of Section 224 was invalid. That was. a proper deduction from the decision of the Australian cases. The words: "In any part of the world," could not be divided so as to mate the section apply to New 'Zealand. While the extra territorial jurisdiction is excluded the section does not consigt of two separate parts, bo that one part might be declared good and another pajt bad. Tie' SolicitorGeneral was asking that the section be i declared valid, as far as it will go, but that is what the courts in Australia have i declined to do. If the section read: "In New Zealand or elsewhere," he admitted that probably the words "or elsewhere," might be declared bad and the result remain good, but here there are no such separate parts. To hold that the section (nay now be read a 9 applying to New Zealand alone would be legislating, not interpreting, the law. Judgment was reserved.