amply for the necessary publicity
they wisely leave the matter
Land
is in our hands so far as our cut members are concerned. We have
to do the
As to our
your
third difficulty that these requirements as to notices, and licences are an interference with the exercise of the Sacrament, I
only regret that I did not formerly sufficiently clearly explain myself. There
can be difficulty in seeing
where
the interference comes in. Every
man has at common
Law
the right to walk the public streets
at any hour of the
day or night.
If you require him to procure a special license or
permit to do so after dark, it is an interference
with his Liberty. The Catholic
church looks upon matrimony
as a Sacrament
and therefore
entirely with her competence
to administer or
refuse to administer it,
subject only to her own laws. Your Ordinance forbids the priests of the church to administer that Sacrament without a permit from
your marriage Registrar and punishes them if they do. It is quite clear that that is an interference with a Sacrament,
if
in Singapore
and in India and
is left free to marry
ecclesiastically or civilly as he
pleases, there can be no objection. The state must see that marriage is made easy for all, but here in Hong Kong you impose the civil obligation on both alike.
In reply to the third
paragraph of your
letter
I may
point out that there are very
grave
reasons why
there should be no
legislation with reference to past
marriage...