THE MARRIAGE LAWS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20384, 12 October 1929, Page 13

THE MARRIAGE LAWS.

BILL PASSED BY COUNCIL.

MEMBER'S AMUSING SPEECH.

DIVISION ON THE PROPOSAL.

[BY TELEGRAPH.—SPECIAL REPORTER.] WELLINGTON. Friday. The Marriage Amendment Bill, introduced in the House of Representatives by a private member, Mr. H. G. R. Mason (Labour —Auckland Suburbs), and in the Legislative Council by the Hon. J. B. Gow, was passed by the Council to-day, although not without a division. The bill passed by the House sought to validate a marriage to a deceased wife's niece or to a deceased husband's nephew. Sir Francis Bell said ho opposed the bill because ho considered the marriage laws of the Empire should be identical. "I do not know what reason there is for a man to marry his deceased wife's niece or for a woman to marry her deceased nephew," ho said, amid loud laughter. Sir Francis Bell: I mean her deceased husband's nephew. Practically, it is her nephew. A Member: You said her deceased nephew. (Laughter.) Sir Francis Bell: The next thing will bo a bill allowing a man to marry his grandmother's wife. (Loud laughter.) After endeavouring, amid the laughter, (o correct himself, Sir Francis said ho hoped tho Council would not pass the bill. The llou. T. S. Weston supported the protest. Sir Heaton Rhodes said he would voto against the proposal. The Hon. J. Barr considered that because the bill departed from the laws of England that was no reason why it should not be passed. It was not necessarily a case of an old man marrying a young girl. Ho supported the bill because it was a right and proper thing. The Hon. L. M. Isitt spoke in support of the bill.

Tho Hon. W. Earnshaw (Wellington) moved that the third reading be adjourned for three months, for two reasons, firstly, because it was undesirable, generally speaking, that such marriages should take place, and, secondly, because there should be moro of a general movement in the Empire toward uniformity in laws.

A division resulted in tho bill being read a third time. Tho voting was as follows:

Ayes (22).—Allen, Barr, Craigie, Fleming,' Garland, Gow, Hall-Jones, Hanan, Isitt, Lang, Macgregor, Mclntyre, Malcolm,'Mander, Moore, Newman, Reed, Scott, Sidey, Smith, Stewart, Thomson. Noes (13). —Bell, Carrington, Clark, Collins, Earnshaw, Hawko, Mitchelson, Rhodes, Rikihana, Sinclair, Snodgrass, Tv'eston, Witty.

TRANSPORT LEGISLATION.

BILL NOT TO BE DROPPED.

ASSURANCE BY MINISTER

[BY TELEGRAFH. —SPECIAL REPORTER.] WELLINGTON. Friday.

A definite indication whether the Government proposed to proceed with the Transport Laws Amendment Bill this season was sought by Mr. J. A. Nash (Keform —Palmerston) in the House today. Mr. Nash said an impression was abroad that the bill was to bo dropped, and in view of the desire of local bodies that the bill should proceed, it was necessary that the position should be clear. The Minister of Transport, the Hon. W. A. Veitch, said there was no authority for any statement that the bill would bo dropped. The Government had not decided to abandon the bill. Mr. Nash: And the bill will go on? The Minister: Yes.

TROUBLE OVER MOTOR-CAR

ARREST OF TWO YOUNG MEN.

[BY TTT.EORAriT. —PJIESS ASSOCIATION.] CHRISTCHUBOH, FriHuy,

Two young men were driven to the police station by a traffic inspector last evening in a five seater car, alleged to have been stolen. In the Pol ico Court to-day Francis Xavier Toohill, aged 19, and Arthur Georgo Coughlan, aged 19, were remanded until to-morrow on a charge of the unlawful conversion of a motor-car valued at £350.