DIVORCE LEGISLATION

Hawera Star, Volume L, 28 August 1930, Page 6

DIVORCE LEGISLATION

| REMOVAL OF ANOMALIES. SEPARATION AGREEMENTS, (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 27. In moving for the committal of the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Amendment Bill m the House of Representatives to-day, Mr H. G. R. Mason, said an important clause of the measure dealt witii the nationality of married women. He instanced cases ' of New Zealand girls who at the time ; of the visit of the American fleet had : married sailors who had sailed away—- ' and that had been the end of it. These girls as the result of marriage to citizens of the United States could not . secure a divorce in a New Zealand j Court, in which they had no status as the result of their changed nationality. , It was desired that such a change of nationality should not he forced upon married women. Another point covered by the Bill dealt with divorce following separation. Under the present law it was possible to proceed on a separation by agreement in New Zealand or by order of the court in New Zealand, but while it was possible to act on an agreement for .separation made outside New Zealand it was not possible to act on an order of a court outside New Zealand. The Bill sought to remedy this anomaly. It. also reduced the period from seven to four years for which it was necessary for one party to be -confined in a mental hospital before divorce could be granted. Mr IV. D. Stewart asked what was the Government’s attitude towards the Bill, and the Hon. J. G. Cobbe replied that the advice placed at the disposal of the Government indicated that it was necessary that the Bill should -he considerably amended before it was passed. It was pointed out that if a . girl married in New Zealand were granted a divorce her husband if a resident, say, of England, would be guilty of bigamy if be married again in England where the divorce was not recognised. At the same time, if a wife were granted divorce„ in New Zealand ana went to the country to which her husband belonged and remarried there she, too, would be guilty of bigamy. Mr IV. D. Ly.suar said such a question .seemed to be one for the Imperial Conference He was opposed to the clause relating to confinement in mental hospitals. The period should not be cut down at all. There were possibly eases in which the wife was responsible for the husband’s oonfine-

met-n in a mental hospital, or vice versa, and in such instances divorce should not be made easy. Mr IV. E. Parry urged till at the State should endeavour to get the young women mentioned by Mr Mason out of their difficulty. Mr R. A. Wright submitted that the only effective method would he for the girls to go to America for a divorce. If they wished to marry again they would surely want a. divorce that would be recognised everywhere. Sir Apirana Ngata pointed out that the House would have an opportunity to deal with the objectionable features of the Bill at a later stage. Mr Mason, in reply, said the point was that the girls concerned were likely to live the remainder of their lives in New Zealand. The difficulty under which they were now living was a present one and it was more imnortant that they should be freed from it than from some verv remote possibility. The same complications as Mr Cobbe had outlined existed in certain divorces already granted under the Act. The motion was adopted.