Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DIVORCE LAW.

MEETING AT EBNDALTON. A meeting of women was held at St. Barnabas's schoolroom, Fendalton, yesterday, in connexion wife the recent amendment to the Divorcei and. Matrimonial Causes Act, 1920. The Iter. H. S. Leach presided over an attendance ot about 40. . . , Mr T. W. Rowe said he did not intend to speak of the recent legation only as tohow it affected women, but ato> as to how it affected the whole community. Up. to last year rtwudj cult to obtain a divorce. The reoenD legislation, however, had now .made « a comparatively easy matter.. A copy of a petition protesting against ttoe legislation haof recently been received by Mrs Roberts, who was well known as a social worker in Chnstohuroh, but a portion of it was so badly worded that, ft had been decided to alter it. in* speaker had advised Mrs Roberts to oiroulate a petition to be signed not only by women, but by men as well, as we question affected one sex just as mucn as the other. Mr Rowe then read a copy of the petition, which prayed for the repeal of section 4 of the Act on four grounds: (1) That the discretion given by the section referred to was, according to the Court of Appeal in the, case of Mason v. Mason, almost entirely illusory; 12) that a (husband or wire guilty of a serious matrimonial offence was, by reason of such offence, not aebarred from obtaining a decree ot divorce against the innocent party ot the marriage, a provision that seemed to strike at the very root of justice; (3) that it was against the principles or English law that a party should plead ihis own wrong as a ground for claiming rights as against a party innocent ot wrong; (4) that in the section mentioned the interests of the children, who are not parties to any agreement ior separation by their parents, were entirely disregarded. Mr Rowe stated that the Legislature seemed to have passed the amendment without thought; vtwas about the worst piece of legislation that they had put through. A vote of thanks was accorded Mr Bow© for his address, and subsequently those present formed themselves into a committee to canvass the district wita v view to obtaining support of the petition.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19211105.2.14

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17295, 5 November 1921, Page 3

Word Count
383

DIVORCE LAW. Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17295, 5 November 1921, Page 3

DIVORCE LAW. Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17295, 5 November 1921, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert