MARRIAGE LAW.

Taranaki Daily News, 5 November 1920, Page 5

MARRIAGE LAW.

BILL AGAIN DEBATED.

THE RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. LEGALITY OF MARRIAGE IN". VOLVED. (By Wire. —Parliamentary Reporter.) Wellington, Last Night. The debate 011 the Marriage Amendment Bill is arousing much interest in the House. This Bill when originally introduced, was quite an unimportant measure, but the Statutes Revision Committee of the Legislative Council, after hearing representations from' the Protestant Political Association, added a new clause making it an offence for any person to question -the validity or sufficiency of a legal marriage, or the legitimacy of the children of such a marriage.

The point in dispute really is whether or not the priests and Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church are entitled to teach that marriage is a sacrament, and that consequently a marriage not blessed by the Church is not a marriage in the sight of the Church The Catholic Bishops have, indicated their willingness to accept the clause in an amended form, providing that it shall be an offence to question the legality of a marriage performed according to law. They have declared that they will refuse to be hound by the clause if it runs counter to the doctrine of their Church. A committee of the House, after hearing evidence, recommended that the clause added by tlie Council should be accepted. THE DEBATE. STATE VERSUS THE CHURCH. MOVE TO DEFER QUESTION. By TelegTiyOi. —Press Association. Wellinglon, Last Night. The interrupted debate was resumed in the House of Representatives this afternoon on the question ''that the report of the Marriage Amendment Bill Committee 011 the amendments made by the Legislative Council in the Bill, together with Hie minutes of the proceedings and the evidence, do lie on the table and be printed."

Mr. R. A. Wright (Wellington Suburbs) answered personal attacks made in the House upon the Rev, Howard Elliott, stating that no less than 200 resolutions had been passed in various parts of flie Dominion supporting the clause now before the House, and complimenting Mr. Elliott on his campaign against the no temere doctrine. In all matters relating to marriage the State and not the church must lie supreme, and that was what the clause meant.

Mr L. M, Isitt (Christelmrch North) said no church in the land approved of the clause before the House, because it limited their power to question unohastity. The time for the introduction of such legislation was inopportune, because there was in the Dominion at the present time between 140,000 to 150,000 Irish Roman Catholics, and everyone knew that owing to things going on in their native land their temperament was not normal, and this legislation was calculated to put a great strain 011 their loyalty The Minister of Justice had said this Bill was not aimed at any particular elmreh, but everyone knew it was aimed at the Roman Catholic Church, and he said it was simply deplorable that the Government should line itself up with the Protestant Politirtil Association, which though nominally political, was really religious. Where was the need for this legislation? There was already a remedy in civil law which might he exercised by a person whose chastity was assailed, and he maintained that children were likewise protected He deprecated the introduction of sectarianism into the politics of the Dominion, and declared that only the direst need should have induced the Government to introduce such a provocative and embittering measure. He asked the Premier to reconsider the position, and consult with the authorities of the Roman Catholic Church, who had promised not to unduly impose their doctrine upon the community, to see if there was not some conciliatory way of solving this problem. For this purpose he moved that (be report be referred back to the committee for further consideration.

-CHALLENGE TO THE CROWN." Dr. H. T. Thacker (C'hristehurch East) contended that the Roman Catholic Church recognised that the civil law must be carried on in the way as at present by the issue of a marriage certificate, but that a marriage should be validated in the presence of the Almighty God by the sacrament of holy matrimony. Mr. V. If. Potter (Roskill) contrary to Mr. Isitt, believed that the present was the time for the introduction of this laivv, because the ne temerc decree had offered a challenge to the Crown and the validity of British law; because, also, things that had been going on in New Zealand should not be allowed to continue. He read from the "pink" catechism of the Catholic Church to show that on the published statement of the Church persons were not considered to be married unless married in the Catholic Church. The fact, that the church authorities had said the publication would be withdrawn from sale did not alter the position. Catholics married to Protestants had asked him to support the Bill, because of the insults shown to them, and the things said of their children. Love, said Mr. Potter, was at times stronger than religion, and people would marry outside their church, and if a legal ceremony was performed those people and their children should not afterwai-ds have to be subjected to insults. .Mr. Holland's bitter attack on Mr. Elliott was not because of the religious discord sown as stated, but because "Mr. Elliot! constantly told his audiences to keep to the constitutional law and remain loyal. Mr. Potter read letters and sialemcnis with the object of showing (hat the Catholic authorities endeavored to induce Catholics married to Protestants to seek ic-marriage by a priest. The statement of various clerics that they would go to gaol rather than obey the new legislation was an attempt to put fear and intimidation into the Government. MR. SMITH ON LIBERTY. Mr. A. Harris (Waiteniata) said he thttuuhi thu law of Naw 2«ftUtid »he\lld

be supreme, and ilint people who desired to observe the laws of. the land should bo protected in that observance, and that wns all that the Bill demanded.

Mr. S. G. Smith (Tarauaki) said that the demand for this legislation was solely the result of the Rev. Howard Elliott's agitation. There was no demand for it from the people. The P.P.A. was a most dangerous organisation, and was being managed by a moat dangerous man. He would vote against the clause, because it did not originate in the Hons*. Tt bad not been asked for in the House, and was being forced on the House by the Legislative Council. It was hasty legislation which, the Council was supposed to cheek. He stood for religious liberty and would vote for religious liberty. Mr. W. A Vcitch (Wanganui) said a study of the evidence had convinced him that some change in the law was necessary to fortify the rights of the State, but he thought the present was not the most opportune time to make that change. Move could be done by tactful negotiation than by this class of legislation. Mr. M. J. Savage (Auckland West) said, as a member of the committee that took evidence on this question, that he wished to disassociate himself with the report of the committee. The value of the evidence given before the committee depended to a great extent upon the credability of a witness. The bulk of the evidence appeared to bo given by Mr. Elliott, and he proceeded to quote references to Mr. Elliott to show his evidence was unworthy of credence.

SPIRIT OF TOLERATION. The debate was continued in the evening, when Mr. P. Fraser (Wellington Centra!) urged members to pause before doing anything that would arouse religious strife. He was not concerned in the churches' differences on theology, but if ever an occasion arose when any church attempted to interfere with the State's functions, lie would be found fighting on the side of the State. If any action was needed regarding marriage (which, in the present case, lie said was not shown to bo necessary), then they should face it courageously and make civil marriage compulsory, allowing the parties to celebrate any religious phase of the ceremony or sacrament according' to the. dictates of their particular faith. If any lesson was to be learned from religious upheavals of the past it was the need for a spirit of toleration. Until recently New Zelaand had been free from religious feeling. The sectarian ferment that had lately arisen would die out, and he believed the people would then again live in amity. No body of men in the country had any right to interfere, as was proposed, with the doctrines of any church in the land.

Mr. Wright said he would vote against the amendment. The clause to which objection had been taken provided protection which was at present lacking for persona in certain circumstances. He asked if any church was justified in passing an edict that was contrary to the law of the land. Members had said there was no demand for an amendment of the law now suggested. but Mr. Wright said the Presbyterian Church several years ago urged action against the promulgation of the ne temero decree in New Zealand, but nothing had been done. No Protestant Church, however, no matter how much it objected to certain provisions of the existing law, had ever questioned the full validity of a marriage contracted under that Jaw, What the objecting churches did do was to resolve to get such provisions altered. So far as the penalty for ati offence against the law was concerned, he thought it need not involve a fine. The removal of the offending clergyman's name from the register would have been sufficient punishment.

"A DISTURBING QUESTION." Mr. H. Atmore (Nelson) deplored the irruption pf this disturbing question in a young country like New Zealand, when men should be concentrating their united efforts on effacing the disastrous effects of the recent war. He agreed that the law of the land must be superior to the religious law of any section of the people, but so long as a church does not impugn the validity of civil marriage the State had 110 right to interfere with a church's doctrines in the matter of the sacramental character of marriage. Mr. F. N. Bartram (Grey Lynn) considered the proposed legislation was a reflection on our civilisation. He believed the Bill was an insidious attempt to smash up the solidarity of the Labor Party. There had been no demand for any amendment of the law as it stood. Mr. W. I). Lysnar (Gisborne) said the Roman Catholic authorities had stated it was already their intention to modify the section of the catechism regarding the sacrament of marriage so that it would not clash with the statute law. If they did this, then they could have no well founded objection to the provisions of the Bill mulct discussion. Mr. J. Edie (Bruce), in supporting Mr. it I it's amendment, said ho was prepared to go on the public platform and justify his vote. He thought it would be a good thiug if the measure was held over till next session, when the feelings of the people might have regained the equilibrum. MR. MASTERS' VIEWS.

Mr. R. Masters (Stratford) said he had not thought much about the matter, and therefore he was prepared to be guided by others who had given it much thought. So far as he eoiild aco 71)73 per cent, of the people were against, and therefore lie was against it. Mr. J, R. Hamilton (Awarua) said the source of all this sectarian bitterness was due to the establishment of the Roman Catholic Federation, which held sway some years ago. So long as it was allowed to do as it pleased, then everything was all right, but so soon as it was opposed, then they were met with the cry of sectarian bitterness. He objected to any church taking up the attitude that if people were not married according' to its particular tenets they were not legally married. Mr. J. McCombs (Lyttelton) asked the Premier to remember his responsibility in this mutter, for his responsibility wns undoubtedly great. If the liill was passed, he feared it would fan the fires ol religious hatred throughout the country He thought the position would have been met. if it had been made an ollcnce to question the validity of a legal marriage. The Bill was merely the price which the Reform Party had to pay for getting ihte office with the aid of tlie P.P.A. PREMIER REPUDIATES CHARGE. .Mr. Massey holly repudiated the sugI gestion that tlie Reform got into power by the aid of the P.P.A., or that ',Jt bad aw »ric» to MX to tUt lipd^