EARL RUSSELLrose to ask the Lord Chancellor whether the law of Scotland allows a divorce a vinculo for desertion; whether this amounts to divorce practically being obtained at discretion or had led to other evils; and whether His Majesty's Government propose to alter the law of Scotland.
The noble Earl said: The noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack the other day in discussing the question of divorce for desertion stated that the effect of such a proposal, as I understood him, was that divorce might practically be obtained at discretion, or almost at discretion, by the parties to the marriage. I understood that that is the existing law of Scotland, and I thought the noble and learned Lord was speaking with some knowledge of the state of affairs in his own country, and I should be glad to know whether this is found to be the result of it. The particular evils suggested by the noble and learned Lord could hardly take place in this country under the Matrimonial Acts, as conduct conducing to the offence would be a bar to the remedy, but there 1687 may be facts with which I am unacquainted which make a ground for granting divorce which has led to these evils. Perhaps the noble and learned Lord will inform the House whether it has been found to be the case in Scotland, and whether it is proposed to alter the law. I wish to put the Question on the Paper.
THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, I believe that according to the law of Scotland if there has been malicious and obstinate non-adherence for four years there may be a divorce after public admonitions in the pulpit and a sentence of excommunication under an ancient Act of Parliament. I am not aware that it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to alter that law. In regard to the remainder of the Question I think the noble Earl will agree that his question is argumentative, and I hope he will excuse me for not offering an argumentative answer.
§ House adjourned at Ten minutes before Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter before Four o'clock.