LEGALISING THE ADOPTION OF CHILDREN.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 6329, 25 July 1881, Page 2

LEGALISING THE ADOPTION OF CHILDREN.

la moving, in the Council on Friday, the second reading of his Bill for the above object, Mr. Waterhouse said the first recorded case of adoption was that of Moses when found in .the bullrushes by Pharaoh’s daughter. The Creeks legalised adoption by legislation of a similar character to that he now proposed. In Rome adoption was encouraged by law, and some of the greatest men in Roman history were adopted children—the conqueror of ..Carthage, Scipio Africauus, the great Emperor Augustus, and perhaps the greatest of all monarchs, Marcus Aurelius, all were adopted in childhood. Adoption in Rome even led to au evil, because some offices, as the pnetoithip, went to those with the largest families, which occasioned the passing of the first Corrupt Practices Prevention Bill to preclude men from getting the necessary qualification by over-adoption. The Germans did not adopt until influenced by Roman civilisation, but now it is legalised with them. Probably, the English, being a branch of the German race, accounted for our position ia the question. In all Latin countries, in / nerca, in India, and all over the East, adop m • was legalised. They must first consider if legalised adoption was desirable, and if so, then if this was of a nature best calculated to effect it. The objects of adoption were generally those . deprived of their natural guardians. Adoption was now checked by the absence of any law by which the adopter was put in a position of responsibility, and the child given to know that it had a legal guardian. Every member must know of cases where persons would adopt children, but f jr the fact teat they would have no legal right, no property, so to speak, in the child. He knew of a case where a clergyman was moat anxious to adopt the child of a deceased friend, but refused to do so unless he was put in a position to have legal control of the orphan, which, after much trouble, he obtained by direction of the Court. Many children now turned out badly through losing their parents, or having neglectful parent-*, who might be saved by adoption. The absence of the proposed law thwarted the kindly feelings of many would-be adopters. The Bill was in accordance with the law prevailing in all enlightened countries. Mr. Whitaker, whose liberal views on all social questions, and whose kindly disposition were well known, had drawn the Bill for him, and he hoped he would asskt in passing it. If his Married .Women’s Prop rty Protection 11*11 and this were passed, he should feel that in a humble way he had obtained some benefit for the community, and have been useful in bis day. —Mr. Wilson was surprised to hear Mr. Whitaker had drawn the Bill, which said a 11 respectable ” person may ad -pt. What was the definition of “ respectable”? There was a c ,se where a witness said a certain murderer, then on his trial, was a most respectable man, because be kept a gig. Here, probably, where gigs were not used, anyone who kept a buggy would be deemed respectable under this Bill. He did not believe any law of this latitude was known in any other country. WI at would be 'thought of a young man adopting a young woman of about his own age ? (Laughter.) By the French law no persm under fifty could adopt, and the adopter must be at least fifteen years older than the adopted, and the child to be adopted must not be under age. (Laughter.) He was surprised to see the term ‘‘respectable.” Many quasi-respectable men were really the very worst characters. (Hear hear.) If the Bill was passed as it stood, they would have some very serious scandals, and he hoped it would go to a Select Committee to be put in proper shape.—Captain Fraser said, from living in France, where adoption was most common, he V .ew a man and wife must be childless and over 40 to be able to adopt. He never heard of people not being adopted unless of age- Why would they want to be adopted when men and women ■ They were generally adopted in France when a few years old. They did not know what might happen in the next ten days, and if the Bill went to a Committee it might be burked altogether. Mr Waterhouse deserved the greatest credit fur his action. (Hear hear;.—Dr. Gr-.ce always advocated adoption, but foun \ these otherwise willing to adopt objected b-c iu=e they would have nolegal control over the children, and that after taking all the trouble, they might have them taken away. Up to 14 years of age adoption should be unrestricted. It was a moat curious fact that |

a very large number of married people in these colonies had no children, and it was only because others had very large families that the average was kept up. Many ol those childless would be glad to adopt if it were legalised. The law would really be a benefit to ihe State and to society generally, for he was certain it would tend to reduce the orphanages in the colony. (Hear, hear.) It was a most unhealthy sign that there was a feeliu" among a large class that they hacl a right to look to the State for eleemosynary aid —that they ought to be kept by the Government in smia way. The colonists of the Southern Hemisphere should learn principles of self-resp-.ct and independence, which formed the strength of a nation. Any child that had once been done for by the State was deteriorated for life. (Hear, hear.) He had seen those who had adopted children—perhaps left with them by a drunken father or mother—suffer all the agonies of real parents by the children being torn from them, possibly only for the purpose of extorting money. If the Bill lessened the number of children sent to orphanages by ten or twelve in the next ten years, itwonM be sufficient to justify pa-sing it. (Hear, hear.) The Bill was a most necessary one. Its principle was most important, because it proposed to deal by law with persons at an age when they were not fit to determine for themselves. ‘ (Applause.) Mr. Whitaker thought a great deal of good might be done by the Bill It was of great importance, inasmuch as it proposed to deal with children in a way which would influence their whole Jives, and therefore must be gravely considered. “ Respectable” could be changed to “ of good repute,” which was a term known to the law.— Mr. Scotland said by the Bill foolish old men—of whom there were many (Hear, hear) — might adopt pretty young girls ; or foolish old womeu might adopt young boys, with or without a view to marriage when enough, (No, no ; and laughter.) He repeated there were plenty of foolish rid people who would do it. Then there was the growing tyranny of capital—adoption had its origin in slavery—and people might adopt a lot of r .children with the intention of making them work in factories. I’eople in England oiteu sold children for a glass of gin, and in this town lately a woman (one who could play the piauo, too) had been sold for 50s. Perhaps she was very dear at the price j but still it had been done. Mr. Waterhouse expressed his great regret at Mr, Scotland’s saying the BUI was introduced from the capitalist point of view, and predicting results which, if he had read the Bill, he would see weie rendered impossible by it. Ho was astonished at Mr. Scotland taking so degrading a view of the question. By the Bill improper relations between adopter and adopted were made incestuous and punishable by ordinary law, as for incest between parent and child. The age was limited to 12. As to parents selling children for a glass of gin, it would be well indeed for children to be taken from parents who would do so. He hoped the Bill would not go to a Select Committee, for he could not forget the present session might be quickly brought to an end. Many things might happen, and he might not be there next | session, and be wished to further this object while he had the power.— Bill read a second time.