DIVORCE LAWS.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17227, 18 August 1921, Page 8

DIVORCE LAWS.

TO THB BDIXOB OF "THB PHEBB." Sir,—The local Council of Churches is auoptmg a most ill-considered attitude' in connexion witn the recent amendments to tne Divorce Act. It is botk glibly and superficially claimed by the Council members tiiat the amendments are lfttie snort of a menace to the State, and opposed to the national welfare, as tending to a wholesale abolition of family life,, whioh is so essential to the existence of. the Empire. Archdoacon Haggitt has particularly objected to the restitution of conjugal rigiits clause. I• am writing merely from memory, but believe I am eorroct in stating that this ground for divorce which appeared in the 1897 or 1898 Act. was repealed in 1907, indirectly as the result of certain remarks made by the late Judga Denniston. From that time until the recent amendments were enacted, dissolution for desertion or separation "was not possible under five years. While this stato of affairs • existed, dissolution was often.forced by deliberate and calculated misconduct. ' Facts speak for themselves. Legal processes are not cheap, and the economic position presses acutely, being a problem of the "largest dimension.'' Thesa factors, apart from the Considerations'of common sense, and the fruits of experience, constitute an effective deterrent to any game. of ducks and drakes with matrimony, and it is certainly amusing to recall Mr North's statement that "ar.y modern young ri} could put up a Harry the Eighth performance," and that a person who nad made one unhappy marriage was very likely to make another. Despite the budget of good tidings recently issued by Judge Rutherford, of U-S.A. the successor to Pastor Russell, the Millennium is yet a long way off. It » practically a foregone conclusion that for many years to come the spectacle of unhappy marriage will be a common one. Any curtailment, therefore, of the existing grounds Tor divorce would not be in the best interests of society. One is tempted to believe, however, that the clergy prefer that an unhappy couple should continue in thoir misery .and beget children under loveless conditions. It must not be forgotten that the clergy, like the Capitalists, advocate , a high birth-rate for the proletariat.. The human tendency to error is all'pervasive, and oven the clergy are not exempted. A person may have all the wisdom of a Solomon and be as experienced as Methuselah, and yet be fated to know unhappiness in married lire. It would seem, however, that nothing short of actual experience could induce them t 0 leave well alone. __ ine laxity that has so aroused the indignation of the Council of Churches is more apparent than real, as witness Judge Herdman's decision m one ot the cases heard last week. ine Divorce Act is be ß t left in the hands of those competent to deal with it. The Council should confine itself to lessor thbgs.-Yours, Christchurch, August 17th.