The Divorce Bill.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4778, 20 July 1894, Page 3

The Divorce Bill.

In tlio Legislative Council yesterday tlio Hon. Mr Shriinskicoutinucd tlio debate on the second reading of tlio Divorco and Matrimonial Causes Act 1867 Amendment Bill. Ho objected to tlio proposal of which tho Hon. Mr Bolt had given notice; to make incurable insanity which lias continued for three years acausofor divorco, Such a law would bo uncharitable, iin-Cliristianlike and unbecoming, and he hoped that tho lion, gontloman would not press tho proposal, Tho Hon. Sir 6, Whitmoro did not agree with tlio proposal to niako adulter}' on tho part of the husband and wife an offence equal in degree, as in his opinion tho ofEencos wero not equal, Ho doubted very much whether any good would be gained by destroying the sanctity of the marriage tie so as to enable people in a moment,of temper to dissolvoit at will, Ho hoped the Council would pause before passing such a measure as this, which went further than anything thoy had had before them previously, Last year they did something for tho ladies, but this was out-Hcroding Herod, He moved that the Bill be read tho second time that day six months.

The Hon Jtr Kerr said the Bill contained grounds for divorce which should not bo tolerated in a Christian country. It was highly necessary in the interests of society that newspapers should publish divorco cases, and although he had been connected with the press for 45 years he had never seen tho privilege abused by newspapers with regard to publishing offensive details in such cases. If greater care woro exercised by persons in tho selection of husbands and wives for themselves ho felt convinced that there would be much less cause than at present for such measures as this, which ho hoped would never become law.

The Attorney-General highly complimented the Hon Mr Kerr on the tone of Lis remarks, and then went on to say that the hopes entertained by tho mover of tho Divorce Bill of 18C7 had not been realised. Speaking for himself and not tho Government, lie said it would bo impossible for liirn to vote for tlio abolition of tho divorce laws, although he would like to see them abolished. He believed that matrimony was ft divine institution, and lie believed the injunction "Whom God has joined together let no man put asunder" was as strong now as ever it was. He bad never beard that any power lwd been able to impart to any Lcgislaturethe power of issuing any mandate of a contradictory character. (Hear, Hear). The Hon Dr Grace said that in 29 years'experience, which had been very large, ho had never known divorces obtained but what one party or both regretted it. The Hon. Mr Rigg thought the Hon. Mr MacGregor had taken np a subject which had been too long neglected in this country. It was the unfortunate persons who had contracted unhappy marriages who required such a law, and the reason of so many unhappy marriages was that they were contracted in too many cases from feelings of sentiment and passion only on tho part |of the woman, and from sordid feelings on the part of tho man. No wonder, then, that the parties to such contracts led unhappy lives. The Colonial Secretary had referred to " those whom God hath joined together," but this measure was intended to deal with those who had not been joined together by such means. New Zealand was far behind Australia in her divorce law, and it was high time some steps were taken to improve tho condition of affairs in this respect. Several of the members spoke to the motion after which the amendment was lost by 18 to 12. The second reading was earned on the voices, and the Bill was referred to the Statutes Revision Committee.