MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE SISTER.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VI, Issue 299, 23 October 1873, Page 6

MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE SISTER.

(A bridged from Hansard. ) Mr Waterhouse, in moving the second reading of the above Bill, referred to the increasing majorities which ' voted for the passage of the Bill through the Lower House. He might say a few words with the view of removing a misapprehension which he found ■was very general in the minds of not only honorable members, but of the public at large — that was, that by the Bill they were seeking to reverse the long-established law of the land. It was only to that point he intended to draw the attention of honorable members, for he was pretty well satisfied that every honorable gentleman had already made up his mind as to what vote he would give upon the Bill. It was only recently that these" marriages had been declared illegal. Up to 1836 they were not illegal ia the eye of the law, but were voidable, only by the action of the Ecclesiastical Courts, taken during the lifetime of the parties interested. Therefore this Bill introduced no* change in a longestablished practice. It simply would reTerse a decision arrived at so recently as 1835. Mr Stokes, who moved the second reading ef the Bill that day six months, quoted largely the opinions of Lord Hatherley on the subject. The Hon. Colonel Brett said, from the religious and social aspect of the Bill, he did not consider that it would in any way militate against the purity and domestic happiness of life, particularly when he took into consideration the wide distinction between affinity and consanguinity. There was no law, either sacred or human, against the kind of marriage which the Bill sought to allow: Ho challenged any honorable memljer to quote any portion of Scripture which prohibited such marriages. He saw, by the records . of the British Parliament, that twenty-six spiritual peeTS,' including two archbishops, had declared it to be their opinion that there was no spiritual prohibition te those marriages. Then, he asked, why did they commit such a gross injustice to the softer sex, who were in a large majority in numbers over the other sex.? At present the matrimonial market was deprived of thousands of widowers, who it was to be inferred would, make good husbands. He considered that the law as it stood created a great deal of evil, and inflicted great hardships npon those who had already contracted marriages of the description referred to in the SiU. He appealed to the Council to do v » tardy act of justice to that section of the community by legitimatizing their children and enabling those children to look upon the'r fellow-creatures without shame ; - and moreover to be allowed all and each of the rig'its of legitimacy. His honorable friend Mr Stokes had quoted a high authority who Wit opposed to the passing of a measure of » meaßtire of this character. He (Colonel Brett) held in his hand the opinion of no less than 200 eminent men in Great Britain and Ireland who supported these marriages very' strongly. They included members of all denominations. Even Cardinal Wiseman gave his consent,' and also some of the most eminent fresbyteriaa clergymen, It was well known that tbe Freßbyterians bad for a long time been opposed to such marriages being allowed, but they had been gradually adopting the generally entertained opinion in the other direction. He did not see why the Presbyterian should be looked upon as the ..model religion. That denomination had its faults as well as others. No religion which man had any hand in forming was faultless Therefore he had not had that respect for the Presbyterian religion which he otherwise would have had, because portions of its tenets had been dictated by man and not by God. His honorable friend Mr Stokes alluded to Germany. This law had been in operation therefrom time immemorial, and it was a pattern country, and one of the most civilised of nations. He confessed there had been for years some little objection to this law on the part of the Catholics, but dispensation could be ebtained from the Pope, and it is seldom refused. Besides, as he said before, he could quote Cardinal Wiseman as being in favor of these marriages. He hoped the Council would not, from any sentimental feeling, be induced 'to throw out this Bill Ia two er three of the neighboring Colonies of Anstralia, Bills legaliisng these marriages had been passed, and in the British House of Commons the Deceased Wife s bister Marriage Bill had been passed sixty-one times since the year 1885, and where it had been recently carried by a majority of ninety-nine. Surely, after the Bill had met with favor from such quarters, they should follow su>t, and not for , any narrow-minded reasons Yajeot it. He was sure it met with the approyal of the people of tbe Colony,

■ Mr Sewell objected to the* Bill, on the , ground that it was not the law' of England. ■ Wheuever the Imperial Parliament thought tit to alter the law in respect to marriage as applicable to Great Britain, it would be time enough for this Colony to follow suit. Captain Fraser'a mind revolted against the idea of marriage with a deceased wife's sister. The Scotch people were decidedly opposed to it Wherever the Bill was brought into operation the number of divorces increased, but in Scotland, where for years past a -divorce could be had for L2O, there was not a single instance of the Scotch people taking advantage of the law of divorce. If any person in Scotland were to marry his deceased wife's sister, he would be hooted and stoned. Dr Pollen would only be induced to give an affirmative vote for the Bill to assimilate the law of the Colony to imperial legislation on the subject » Mr Holmes said the generally entertained objection to the Bill was shared in by the Scotch people of Otago, and he believed of other parts of the Colony, and it was directly opposed to all their ideas of marrirge. Colonel Kenny would vote against the Bill on political, social, and national grounds. " Mr Acland hoped the Council would throw out the Bill every time it was brought before them, until the law of England was changed. The lion Mr Ngata'a said what had been spoken about that day was right. Marriage with a deceased wife's sister was a Maori custom, and had been an old custom amongst his ancestors. When a wife died, a man could marry the sister, who would be able to ,take care of the children, lest he should marry a strauge woman who would take no care of the children. It is the Maori law, it was the law in times past, and is so up to the present time. He was in that position. His wife died, and he married her sister. He would vote for the Bill. The Hon. Mr Mantell was understood to say that he could not appreciate the force of the reasons urged against the passing of the Bill, and they were rather sentimental than founded on good sense, tie was glad the Hon. Mr Ngatata bad the manliness to state his view of the matter, and he thought they ought to pay some deference to customs which had been observed in the country from time immemorial ; and . when they found the institutions of the country more sensible than those they had left behind, they should adopt them. He should support the second reading of the Bill, and hoped he would live to do so until he found himself voting with a majority, iv common with the Hun. Colonel Brett and the Hon. Mr Waterhouse. At present there appeared to be a foregone conclusion against the Bill. The Hon. Mr Scotland hoped that the Council would not hesitate to pass the Bill from any fear of wounding the feelings of the Scotch, for statistics showed that on the score of morality Scotland was not in advance of other countries. The Bill, he thought, did not go far enough, and he would wish to see legalised marriage with a deceased brother's widow.