(Editor, "North-China Daily News," 1911-1939)
London, June 30.
Once again, in its discussion of Mr. A. P. Herbert's Divorce Bill, the House of Lords has proved itself the finest debating society in Europe Seldom has there been heard such a series of trenchant well-argued speeches, There were great experts in law and medicine with wide experience of marriage difficulties and gruesome stories to tell. There were arguing for 1,000th time whether Christ did use the words about divorce attributed to Him by St. Matthew and St. Mark, or whether they. were inserted later by an over-enthusiastic disciple of St. Paul, There were Bishops who declared the Bill to be most Christian; and Christians, evidently congratulating themselves on not being Bishops, who denounced it as most unchristian, But in the end the Lords passed the second reading by a large majority.
Lord Salisbur.
Speech One of the best speeches against the Bill was that of Lord Salisbury who incidentally has just celebrated his golden wedding. His great point was that the marriage law should be stable, that everyone should know what it was and on what it rested. Mr. Herbert's Bill introduced a vagueness and insecurity in marriage, Desertion was introduced as a reason but there was no definition of desertion," It opened the door to collusion and immorality for people would say "If I am to be free in three years, what harm is there in my anticipating a little?" Insanity was to be a cause. But if insanity (the incurable nature of which might be very hard to prove), why not other ill ne which prevented marital relation And with these new uncertainties people would say presently, "A little political agitation and we can get the law altered again."
In fact, the thin end of the wedge with marriage in the end as unsubstantial in England as it is in Reno.
Lord Dawson of Penn said that the question was one of the changed sense of values during the past 2 years, In bygone days woman was but the submissive slave of her husband. With the growing equality [argument used By its, supporters strikes one s not a little curial Tt is crystal d in The Times follows Beyond question divorce is contrary to the highest Christian standard legislation must deal with the act World as it exists to-day and legislation can turn it into the World as should be.
The line of argument far trans-conds of diver alone.
Clearly it implies that any fundamental prin. ciple of Christianity which society finds- inconvenient must be got rid of by legislators. In fact, Christianity most be made for man, not man for Christianity And that "little word "to-day" in "The Times" argument seems to give away the case particularly badly.
"The Bill has still several hurdles to get over. Numerous amendments have already been sent in for the Committee stage in the Lords. When these are done with they have to be accepted by the Commons who may send back the Bill to the Lords with further changes. Unless the Bill becomes law this session, that is before the end of July, it may be held up indefinitely.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.