DIVORCE LAW AMENDMENT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23205, 1 June 1937, Page 8

DIVORCE LAW AMENDMENT

Mr A. P. Herbert has received many congratulations on the passage of his Marriage Bill by the House of. Commons. It was an exceptional achievement on his part to pilots a Bill through ail its stages in the House, for the opportunities which private members have of so doing are very limited—even as they are in the New Zealand Legislature—and the success in Mr Herbert’s case is the more noteworthy because both of the contentious nature of some of his proposals and also of the fact that as an Independent member he had no special party backing that was likely to be of assistance to him. As it happened, however, the merits of his Bill were regarded as such that he obtained support from all parties. The main principles of this measure are that, while for the first five years after marriage there shall be no divorce—though judicial separation and other reliefs, including nullity, are provided for—thereafter there shall be extensions of the grounds of divorce to include desertion, cruelty and insanity for specified periods. It is probable that, after the Bill had reached the committee stage, obstruction by an opposition which apparently consisted of not more than some forty members would in ordinary circumstances have proved fatal to it. The Government, however, recognising that the feeling of the House was strongly in favour of the measure, accorded extended faculties for the consideration of it. Not otherwise could the Bill have reached its third reading. Thus, in the course of a few months in his first Parliament, Mr Herbert has achieved a victory in a field in which for many years the existence of what has been regarded as an almost impregnable rock of opposition has been apparently accepted as a matter of course. Prior to that he did notable work with his able pen in bringing the whole question of the need of reform in the marriage laws before the public, not least so perhaps in that illuminating book “ Holy Deadlock.” Certainly his Bill has yet to come before the House of Lords, but it is clear that he has been attacking the divorce problem in a manner that has secured the support of people in all walks of society, including representatives of the Church, which has been usually associated in public opinion with unrelenting opposition to any exten-' sion of the grounds for divorce. As it is, Mr Herbert’s Bill does not actually go as far as recommenda-, tions for the reform of the English' divorce laws which were embodied; in the majority report of a Royal. Commission which examined that' problem more than a quarter of a' century ago, and expressed the hopethat if its proposals were adopted, they might in time be accepted throughout the Empire. The dominions have dealt with the problem, in their own way. There is nothing in Mr Herbert’s measure that is likely, on the grounds of liberality of outlook, to cause surprise to the, people of New Zealand in view of their own laws governing divorce. Speaking at the time of the introduction of his Bill, Mr Herbert declared that while an object in was to strengthen the institution o| marriage and family ties, the preseni law was wicked; there was collusioid and perjury, and the wrong people got what they wanted while the right people suffered. His words received strong ' endorsement somewhat recently in an uncompromising pronouncement by Mr Justice Swift: “ The divorce laws of this country, to my mind, are wicked and cruel. I wish some of those learned ecclesiastics who have so mucji concern for the well-being of society would come and sit here. It would not be long before the divorce lavfcs were altered.”

ANOTHER DISTURBING INCIDENT t It is ini accordance with the common experience in relation to controversial international episodes that two version's have been provided concerning the bombing of a German warshijp off one of the Balearic Islands. A message from Valencia, the temporary seat of the Spanish Government, declares that the warship opened fire on two loyalist aeroplanes and that bombs were dropped in retaliation. The German assertion, on the other hand, is that the bombing of the vessel was entirely without provocation. To this the Spanish Government has the reply ! that the vessel was not ten miles, from the coast, as is required in thin case of patrol ships of the non-iptervention Powers, and furthermore that the harbour of Ibiza, j whew the acknowledged incident ; occur red, is, for the purposes of the scheme of observation, under control by the French and not by the Gerriian authorities. From these confecting, statements one established fact emerges that a German warship, the Deutschland, was bombed by Government planes, with some loss of life. This, added to previous incidents or allegations, is a disturbing matter. The Nonintervention Committee had only two j days previously received a complaint that an Italian warship had been bombed by Spanish Government planes, when six officers were killed, and the German Government had, 1 complained of a patrol vessel being endangered during an air raid. Thdse reports convey the sugges-, tioa that the Spanish Government is iaking rather less than the most scrupulous care to prevent actions which, however traditional to the code of war, are distinctly provocative. On the other hand, it is clear that the Government is itself being moist severely provoked through the presence of Italian and German forties with the insurgents. But the loyalists also number helpers from beyond the shores of ;i Spain among thefir. forces, and, however much they may be provoked, are not in a position to bring Germany and Italy inio l declared and open antagonism to J them. It will be deplorable, to say the least, if incidents such as thpse reported in the past few days are; permitted to recur. The fnood notf only of the harassed Spanish Government, but of the Italian and German Governments, if for less reason, is unconciliatory, and it is impossible to ignore the danger that almost any untoward occurrence may provide a spark capable of being fanned into a conflagration more serious than the present tragic war in Spain.