§ 4. The failure of the parents or either of them to furnish information as required by this schedule in respect of any legitimated person shall not affect the legitimation of that person.
§ THE EARL OF MIDLETON moved to leave out paragraph 4. The noble Earl said: I almost hesitate to address your Lordships after the reproof which I have received from the noble and learned Viscount opposite, but really the noble and learned Viscount, who sat in another place, surely knows that some of the most pertinent discussions that have ever taken place used to take place on going into Committee, and in your Lordships' House, where at times Bills are brought forward and debated at the last moment by a very few persons, it is not only a desirable right but a right which I hope your Lordships will constantly exercise.
§ With regard to the allegation of the noble and learned Viscount that I was trying to raise a Second Reading point, there again I join issue with him. It is quite possible to say at one and the same time that a man by marriage with a woman may legitimise a child, and also to say that if that child wishes to establish rights to property or otherwise it must be registered by those who are responsible for its birth. When the noble and learned Viscount speaks of the law of Scotland, I would remind your Lordships of the statistics we read the other day, by which it was proved that in Scotland illegitimacy is 50 per cent. higher than it is in England. That is not exactly the object or intention, as far as I know, of the Bill, and, even if it were, it shows that if the number of cases may be so largely increased we ought to be particularly careful.
§
I cannot myself see the slightest advantage now in providing that re-registration of the birth of children legitimised should be part of the proceedings because, by paragraph (4) of the Schedule, it is now laid down that
The failure of the parents or either of them to furnish information as required by this schedule in respect of any legitimated person shall not affect the legitimation of that person.
947
Therefore we come to this point, that it does not matter what period of years has passed. Those who are to be bereft of their natural inheritance by the introduction of children who have not the same claim at all events as they have, and of whose existence they were probably wholly unaware, are not to be furnished with the one weapon by which they can decide whether or not these are really their brothers and sisters—namely, by the registration in the ordinary course of those attested by the parents as being their illegitimate children, now legitimised by the marriage. I cannot imagine on what grounds the Lord Chancellor can resist this Amendment, and I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Schedule, page 7, lines 6 to 9, leave out paragraph 4.—(The Earl of Midleton.)
§ LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAMI hope the Lord Chancellor will accept this Amendment. I am not hindered in expressing my views on it by the speech of the noble and learned Viscount opposite, who says that if we alter this paragraph we shall be going contrary to the law in Scotland. Now, I have always had a very great admiration for Scotsmen, but I do not think it is at all necessary that we in England should always follow Scottish law, and especially in this case when, as I understand from the noble Earl, the result is to make Scotland very immoral. I am quite certain that none of your Lordships desire in any way to promote immorality.
Let us see what the effect of paragraph 4 would be. A man is living with a woman who has a child, very likely not by him. Being a clever woman and the man being, perhaps, a rather weak sort of person, she persuades him to marry her. From the fact of that marriage, as I understand—I may be wrong—all the children existing at the time are legitimated. It may be that after the marriage the man thinks he has made a mistake. It is not unusual after marriages to find that mistakes have arisen even when those marriages have been made in proper and ordinary circumstances. The man in question might come to the conclusion that he has made a mistake. He might find out that the child was not his but that of some other man and, therefore, does not take the necessary steps to 948 register that child. This Bill provides that notwithstanding that he has not registered that child, after his death and the death of the mother, as I understand it, the child may go to a County Court Judge and claim to be legitimated. The people who would know whether that child was really the child of the father or not are dead. In those circumstances, I cannot conceive why my noble friend the Lord Chancellor should not accept this Amendment. I understood him to say a short time ago that it would be hard on the child to subject it to the caprice of the parents. It is much harder on the family to admit into their ranks somebody who has nothing whatever to do with them. I hope, therefore, that my noble friend s Amendment will be accepted.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI do not in the least complain of this Amendment being moved. I have often said that I entirely understand the point of view of my noble friend who moves it and that there is great weight in what he has said to-day and on previous occasions. But the House has taken its decision more than once and I think it is the right decision. Two courses are open to Parliament. One is to say that marriage shall legitimise the illegitimate children of the two spouses. The other is to say that marriage plus registration shall do so. Parliament has chosen the former course and I think it is right; for I remain of opinion that it is not right to leave the status and position of a child entirely at the mercy of the caprice or the carelessness of the parents who might not register within the time allowed. Therefore, on the point of principle which my noble friend has raised, I hope I have made my position absolutely clear.
I will only add that all these dangers which are anticipated have not occurred in Scotland where this has been the law for ninny generations; and I see no reason to suppose that a law which has worked well and justly in Scotland should not have the same effect in this country. I want also to say, because I have always been frank with my noble friend the noble Earl, that if he carries this Amendment it will not in my view in the least bring about the object which he desires. He is moving an Amendment to what is merely a saving clause, which provides that if the parents neglect the duty thrown upon them by the Bill to furnish 949 information for the registration of their child their Failure shall not affect the position of the child. I say frankly that if this paragraph was omitted I think the effect of the Bill would be the same. This is only part of the machinery Schedule of the Bill and nothing that you do in respect of paragraph 4 will alter the effect of Clause 1 of the Bill, which is to legitimise the child upon marriage. While I say that, I would much rather keep the paragraph in the Schedule. I think it makes clear that which in any case would be the law, and it would be unwise to confuse the provisions of the Schedule or throw doubt upon them by omitting this paragraph when you do not in the least produce the effect which my noble friend desires. In the circumstances I hope that my noble friend will not press his Amendment.
§ THE EARL OF MIDLETONAfter what has fallen from the Lord Chancellor I fully accept the definition he has given of the difference between us. We desire that marriage plus registration should legitimise because of the very grave danger which my noble friend Lord Banbury has pointed out. In regard to the acceptance of this Amendment making no difference, if your Lordships exclude paragraph 4 from the Schedule there will not be the slightest difficulty in the Report stage in inserting words which will make it perfectly clear that registration is required as part of legitimation. Therefore, I hope your Lordships will support my Amendment.
§ LORD DANESFORTMay I say with great respect that I entirely agree with the Lord Chancellor that this particular paragraph of the Schedule does not deal with registration at all. It deals with the question of the parents furnishing information. Paragraph 2 of the Schedule provides that it shall be the duty of the parents to furnish information; not to register, but to furnish information; and paragraph 4 says that the failure of the parents to furnish information shall not affect the legitimation. Therefore, even if paragraph 4 were omitted I do not think it would in any way effect the object which the noble Earl has in view. The question as to the necessity of registration which he has raised appears to me, however, to be an exceedingly important one and, 950 perhaps, he would consider between now and the Report stage the putting down of an Amendment raising more directly and in a complete form the question whether registration shall be necessary or not before legitimacy is established.
§ TEE EARL OF MIDLETONIn those circumstances and after what my noble and learned friend has said I ask leave to withdraw this Amendment, with that object. I hope the noble and learned Viscount will give us time before the Report stage to frame such an Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Schedule agreed to.