THE DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER BILL.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 18, 16 October 1907, Page 3

THE DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER BILL.

", ■; .-. . (By- Constance Clydo.) . - It is a strange fact, that the passing of the Deceased Wife's Sister Bill by , tho British Parliament should bo invariably considered as , peculiarly beneficial to women, and 1 specially desired by. thorn.. So much is this taken for granted , (writes Constance Clyde -to the Sydnoy '-Telegraph") that some-years ago an ontlmsiast actually.went tho rouuds ii-ith a petition to .be signed by women only, and only by. unmarried women, who would be likoly, as he put it, to liavo a chanco of benefiting by.it. --'This is not a measure l to compel a man to marry his: wife's sister," announced Lord Twceumbuth, ■ amongst cheers. But. why. continually 'picture the harassed - bruthef-iji-law as thus pursued ? Why does no.one assure the poor trembling sisoer-in - - law that, in spito of, all, stern legal .-anactment, she shall bo as free to seok fresli pasturos as before? , '■;..;■ ■■-, : .-

It is difficult, for liberty-loving Australians to realise, general British sentiment with regard to, this; law-,, as .they,;cannot understand the 'restricted iliycs, still led by j large"of British girlhood. Many such provincial, damsels,..being below the:society set, and not rich.enough ,■ to!-travel,have piactic■'ally few or no .chances of-marriage ,Spite ; 6i their tennis, hockey, etc., they have less than a French.girl, for .whom niatchmaking-in permissible."/. Allowing for this defioncy ihi English social lifo, one still cannot quite realise that under the,now.law she should be Expected to !feel,a secret glibul-likp. satisfaction whbn ; sistpr Jane annexes,a fiancee,.or to exporiene'e'more '.embarrassment,.'with, a .sister's, husband than with the husband of that best friend who is often more than . a sister. Nevertheless', from more than , onq educated and sensible ■woman I have , heard the remark; "If this bill passes, I don't see how i can'ever visit my brother-iri-law'againl" ' It will be pereeived; ! tHerefore,itliat .what tin Bill had'to contend against was'the young embarrassed sister-in-law'herself, and" not as is so'.often alleged, any age-old laws.: As Bernard' Shaw truthfully points out) iuaiiy of those enactments which ;we believe to be handed down from the bad old times were really passed, some in the Victorian, lionie even in the Edwardian era;; This is certainly the case ; with the'problem" now before 1 us. When the Archbishop of' Canterbury made his magnificent peroration'in tho House regarding the marriage law "as having the E:anctjon of Chrictian centuries ' bohind it," ho quite forgot to mention .tnat tins section of the'.marriage law was passed not till. 1835, while even later, there. was some variety oi opinion on the subject. Before that period riiarriage with a deceased wife's sister was permissible, and in some cases was carrier! out quite without.comment.'..So-far from be/, ing vthe' age. of progress, the Victorian era, was, in many, respects', tho-period when/the chains were most firmly riveted on. Perhaps Lord Onslow, who figures amongst tho ayes, will,bo ablo/to inform quostioners ,that the legalising of such 'marriages in New: ■Zealand arid Australia has not made for,"red ruin or tho breaking up of homes".' any more thaii it did during-tho many centuries of thr Christian era;' whilo," at irio same time, 'it' n regarded; not'as vulgarly giving the anxious maidon another string.to her bow',- but'merely ,as,-;signifying the desire for human- freedoni that animates the younger nations.' 1 ' ■■<■ - ; "