3 months thereafter.
Le + on the 7th of August, the Ph. G. might at the request of either party have issued the certificate on the 25th.
On the 25th of May, the parties presented themselves for marriage at the Church of the Immaculate Conceptions. The certificate was demanded but was not forthcoming, neither party having applied for it to the Ph. G. The parties urged that the marriage could proceed without serious inconvenience and that there would be no difficulty in obtaining the certificate. The Priest, a young and inexperienced clergyman, considered that there had been a substantial fulfillment of the law and proceeded to marry them. The certificate was obtained from the Ph. G. on the 27th of May, the intervening days having been dies non.
There was presumably no objection to the marriage, but there was a formal infraction of the law, rendering the deceased and the marriage invalid under S.28, whilst the Priest is liable to penalty under S.30.
MINUTE PAPER.
227
I must leave the parties to get out of the difficulty how they can.
It has been further alleged that the Church of the Immaculate Conception was not licensed, but I understand the Bishop to contend that there had simply been a change of site of the Church of that name and that either (1) a new license was not necessary or (2) some 100 marriages celebrated without question had condoned the want of license. Further adverting to Ss.28 and 30 of the Ordinance, it appears to me to be (1) doubtful whether such a license is imperative, and (2) the Priest subject to penalty.