I.—7.

18

R. wo on

Rev. Mr. Wood : The Presbyterian Church has not spoken on the matter as a Church, hut T have no objection to the clause of the Bill as it. is. It is a matter for the Assembly. The Chairman: Can you persuade Bishop Cleary to take no objection to the clause "{ Rev. Mr. Wood : 1. think this is a most important point : Schroder's positive statement, is, " No true marr age can exist between Christians by force of a civil contract, and it is true'that either the contract of marriage between Christians is always a sacrament, or that the, contract is null il the sacrament has been excluded." And Schroder, the expositor of canon law, adds, " And thus, therefore, every connection entered upon between man and woman among Christians, by virtue of J a civil law, and without the sacrament, is nothing else than a shameful and corrupt concubinage, condemned by the Church. Therefore the marriage tie can never be separated from the sacrament." When Bishop Cleary amends the catechism by stating that marriage between a Protestant and a Catholic before a Protestant minister or .a civil Registrar is not a sacramental marriage, what he says is that, according to the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church just as was said in the previous issue of the catechism—it is not a marriage at all.

W. W. Cook, further examined. The Chairman : You have read the letters received by the Key. Robert Wood from, the RegistrarGeneral in 1912. I understood from your statement the other day that it was'quite irregular to issue a second certificate of marriage ?- Ido not say that. It is not. an uncommon thing to issue a second certificate, where persons previously married before a Registrar are subsequently married in a Church. Then his statements are correct ? —Yes. Hon. Mr. Lee : When a marriage is to bo solemnized a declaration is made and a certificate authorizing the marriage'is issued ? —Yes. Then, when the marriage takes place before a Registrar the marriage is finished with ? Yes. The two people are married : then how can you issue a certificate for a second marriage ? It is not a marriage, because the people are already married under the law ? Well, it has been done. What is the authority for it ? —The opinion of one of the Grown Law Officers. What is your view of the practice of issuing a certificate authorizing a marriage which is not a marriage at all according to law ?-• Where they have been previously married in a Registrar's office and are going again to be married in their Church, I see no objection. Is it a second marriage ?—lt is sometimes referred to as a marriage. But supposing that people are married before a Registrar, and ten years afterwards you issue a certificate for their marriage in a Church I have never heard, of that happening. It makes no difference if it is ten minutes afterwards or ten years ; there would be no objection on account of the lapse of time ?- No. Well, say ten years afterwards they get a certificate and are married in a Protestant Church, and the clergyman sends in the usual form. How would they be. described. ? They would be described as having been previously married on a certain date. Do you enter the second marriage in your books ? —Certainly, if it is gone through in the ordinary course. You enter up that marriage just as a marriage under the Act ? —Why not ? They are married under the law. Because there is no authority for the marriage of married, people ?- It lias been done from time immemorial. Do you appreciate the difficulties'that might result ?—I have never known of any. Would you issue a certificate of the marriage ten years afterwards ? If they asked for it. Hon. Mr. Anderson : Supposing a question arises as to who is entitled to property ?- That question does not concern us. Do you count the second marriage as another marriage in your statistics ?- I do not know what the Government Statistician does. I. do not make out the statistics. I simply record the marriage. Hon. Mr. Lee : Gould you tell us how many of these second marriages occur in twelve months : would it be hundreds ? Nothing like that. Not more than a dozen. Probably about half a dozen. For what Churches are these certificates usually issued ? The Roman Catholic will be one ?--Yes. And the Church of England ?— -Yes. Any other denomination ?—The Methodist. The Jews ? Ido not think so. In the case, I mentioned where there was a second marriage in a synagogue they did not get a certificate. Ren. Mr. Wood : Have you ever known a Presbyterian apply for a second, authorization ?• I cannot say. I know of a number of cases in the (Jhurch of England. Two friends of mine were married in a Registrar's office first. What was the interval between the two marriages ?— In one case some months, at any rate. Suppose that a child was the fruit of such a marriage ? I have nothing to do with that. Rev. Howard Elliott : 1 think the practice has grown up in some casual way, and then a deliberate legal opinion, such as Mr. Mansfield obtained, has given it a kind of sanction ; but it. is a very disastrous practice. Rev. Mr, Wood : Could you say how far back this practice of issuing a second certificate to parties already married began I—l1 —1 could produce our legal-opinion book. The legal opinion on the point is very old. Rev. Howard Elliott : I am only concerned with one point, and that is that no person in this country, whether ecclesiastic or layman, shall have the right to call in question the validity- the legal validity or the full and sufficient character —of a legal marriage ; that if lie does "that kind of thing