post want of it (2) astein that the marriage is not invalid for the want of such license unless the parties were aware of it, which I do not suppose they were,
The Bishop, however, has made this case the occasion for disparaging the Hong Kong Ordinance and expresses a preference for the Indian Act (1865) or the Straits Settlements Ordinance (1880). These enactments, however, appear to relate only to one or both marriage parties to which are Christians. On the other hand, the Hong Kong Ordinance does not appear to be confined to any particular denomination, and in this respect, it may be preferable to the other two. Nor, I take it, for example, do I quite see how it would have removed any difficulty in the case of the present marriage, nor do I see how it would have met the needs of the Bishop in the case of a marriage "in articulo mortis", but I do notice that under the Straits Settlements Ordinance the marriage must be celebrated before a Registrar, whatever else follows, whereas under the Hong Kong Ordinance there is no such restriction.
At any rate, I see nothing in the dubious marriages to call for an...
MINUTE PAPER.
228