NE TEMERE DECREE.

Taranaki Daily News, 2 December 1922, Page 7

NE TEMERE DECREE.

(Extract from Mr. Masters’ speech at Ratepiko on November 27.)

Mr. Masters dealt at some length at Ratapiko on the question of his alleged vote against the Marriage Law Amendment Bill. In opening his remarks, Mr. Masters said he was speaking to liis audience not in anger, but in a spirit of regret. “One cannot help regretting that at such a time we have disintegrating questions of this nature forced upon a little country like New Zealand,” he said. Mr. Massey himself had stated in the House in 1912: “It was a great pity the question of sectarianism should be raised in this country; one man in this country is as good as another. We should not interfere with any man on account of the manner in which he worships 'fiis Creator.” “I am,” said Mr. Masters, “an adherent of the Methodist Church, and Mr. Massey is a Presbyterian, and the views expressed by him in 1912 in the House of Representatives is the opinion I have always expressed and express to-day. “It has been said that I voted against the Bill, bift those who make the statement know full well that such a statement ie> contrary to the truth. The only vote I exercised was that of voting that the matter be referred back to the committee for further consideration. This resolution was defeated, and no further divisions were taken. And anyone who I knows the first thing about Parliamentary proceedure knows in order to record a protest against suggested legislation becoming law, one must register that vote in the second or third reading of the Bill.” “The whole campaign in connection i with this matter savours.” said the sneaker, “more of political expediency thayJK-eligious principles. Who would rßvwfcr instance, that Mr. Isitt, the EPreafrljte or Vice-President of the , Conference, was actuated by {Mgmcher than highest motives, and yet he Was the member who moved that the select committee’s report he referred back for further consideration. “Mr. K. Williams, member for Bay of Plenty and son of Bishop Williams, of the Anglican Church, voted for the referring back of the committee’s report. It was also a coincidence that in «a pamphlet that is being distributed at the present time a statement is made ‘that some members of the Liberal Party abstained from voting.’ but at the same time only mentioned one (Mr. Vigor Brown), who by the way, has not been associated with the Liberal Party during the whole of last Parliament, but rather voted on no-confidence motions with Mr. Massev. Why do those who are responsible for the circulation of the pamphlet suppress the names of five Reformers who ‘dodged’ the vote — Messrs. Mander. Uru. Campbell. Nash and Henare. The indication is clear as to the purpose of the propaganda. However, I am not alone bv any means in this matter. The Rev. Isaac Jolly, prominent in the Presbyterian Church, characterised the proposed legislation ‘as a piece of monstrous folly,’ and said: ‘As a Presbyterian, I believe that God alone is Lord of conscience, and I object to a Roman Catholic priest being sent to gaol for his religious convictions. Every intelligent Protestant will object to it.’” The Presbyterian Conference at Dun- ; edin passed the following resolution: ' “On the ground that Clause 6 appears 1 to infringe upon the spiritual in- . dependence of the Church and its right to exercise discipline in regard to its own members and hopes that the legislation may yet devise a means to meet the situation that will be free from these objections.” Archdeacon Fitchett, preaching at Dunedin, said: “It affected not only those of Roman allegiance, but the whole Anglican Church in the Dominion. The Roman Catholic Bishop had made it clear that if the proposal became law they would break the law, pay fines, and suffer the penalty of imprisonment. It was well that the members of the Anglican Church should know that their Bishop would do the same.”

Bishop of Nelson: “f have nn hesitation in saying that the proposals now before Parliament will not affect the amendment which our moral consciousness and our sense of justice requires.”

“No Parliament can make moral what Christ has declared to be immoral.” “I contend that if the Parliament of the country deems it necessary to amend the law in order to protect those who are married according to the law of the land, it should do it in some other way than by using equivocal terms and hy making provisions which will infringe the most sacred religious liberty,” added Mr. Masters.

AN ANGLICAN APPEAL. RESOLUTION BY DIOCESAN COMMITTEE. The following resolution was passed by the Diocesan Committee of the .Anglican Church: “This standing committee of the diocese of Wellington, while fully acknowledging the competence of the State to frame its own code for legally valid marriage, yet, inasmuch as the proposed amendment of the Marriage Act appears, as at present worded, to make it penal for any religious society to set before its own members the ideal of marriage contained in the Gospel respectfully begs Parliament not to impose this restriction of religious liberty.” “I have been accused of making an impassioned speech in Parliament on the Bill.” said Mr. Masters. “The last paragraph of my speech in Hansard reads: ‘I appeal to the Prime Minister, and I earnestly hope he will see the seriousness of the position, as I believe it is going to create religious strife in this country. I trust he will allow the report to go back to the committee for further consideration, and see if it is not possible to arrive at a modification of the Clause that will meet with the approval of all parties concerned.’ I tried then as I am trying now, to view the position dispassionately without heat, without anger, and with a spirit of tolerance.” Mr. Masters entered his strong protest against individuals handing out to children of tender years at school these circulars making reference to “bastards” and “illegitimates,” and using them as a medium for disseminating this class of literature. No Protestant with a sense of propriety and decency would tolerate little children to he used for this purpose. It was degrading the politics of the Dominion, and the real issues affecting the State and well-being of the Dominion are being clouded by those possessing narrow views. Mr. Masters, in conclusion, said lie felt it incumbent upon him to make this statement, as he felt that possibly a section of the community not conversant with the real position might be influenced bv such deplorable tactics. $ by arrangement.)