Star. — London, England, 1823-06-04 00:00:00

his ally in opinion no less a parson than the very fit.. Ecclesiastic in the land; this, also, he had for ano ther ally the Noble Earl at the head of his Majesty's Government ; he had also an Ecclesiastical Jude; and all agreed in this—thatno man should putasunder those whom Gov had joined by his revealed law Were those allies then sincere is the cause he espotu with diem, or was it intended to beg i uile the put mind into a persuasion so proper? Again, he ' presumed that the general opinion of the House went with him, a, fat as the doctrine that when marriages were •otentilised they never could be dissolved or voided. He had now stated so fully the opinions of those Noble Lords whom he formerly had counted as his allies, that there remained but little for himself to add. Wa, it either wise or fitting, or tending to the decorum of civilised life, to bring forward laws op posed to the injunctions of Goo? He, therefore, put it distinctly to their Lordships how far marriage was to be set at nought, even as it respected the office of the Clergy ; for when the sacred rite had been per formed, and the solemn benediction had been pro nounced by the officiating Priest, were the parties to lead a religious life together, or the woman to be consigned to immorality, and their offspring to de gradation and beggary? When he came to the legal part of the Bill, enacting that minors should not marry at all without the consent of parents or of guardians, though he agreed to the principle, et, again, let their Lordships see how the present Bill was likely to work. The object of the Bill implied five questions to be asked and answered; as—who was the father of a minor ; what also was the state of the mother; then, if the minor's own mother (say the minor a girl) were secretly married, and whether her lover's mother, being a wido*, were married in se crecy too. Such questions as these, which even a Judge might be unable to decide, were, however, to be put roundly to a young lady " full of the thoughts of a husband ;" and yet her replies might invalidate her own nuptials, and destroy her peace. As to con sent in marriage, with regard to parents or guardians, those Mho had attended to the Ecclesiastical Courts could hardly find what the meaning of consent was. Next core the question as to age; and here if the lady w ere two days older than she supposed herself to be, while her suitor was only two days younger than it had been represented to him, the marriage was to. a become void. Again, was the consent of pa rents and guardians to be implied or written ? There. was no provision for the alternative in this case. He wanteJ t.' know, also, in what state the husband was to be placed during this temporary occupancy of the person of the wife? Could he buy or sell land, or alienate it,- or make any kind of arrangement as to propeity that would afterwards be valid by law? The LORD CHANCELLOR rose to a point of Order, and arrested the attention of the Noble Earl. The - Nrthle and Learned Lord observed, that he ap piehemied that the NolAe Earl (Westmoreland) was not strictly in order, and he was confirmed by the opinion of Noble Lords around him. It was not ac cording to order for any .Noble Lord, while the House was proceeding to go into one, and that Committee net being yet sitting, to move that it should be an instruction to the Committee to omit one particular clause: If such a practice were .allowed, then it mould.he competent fur other Noble Lords to move the omis s ion clime after clause, and thus their Lordships would never get into a Committee at all. The Earl of WESTMORELAND-If, after what has ilillen from the Noble and Learned Lord upon the Woohack, I can bring myself to order, isball move your Lordships to go into a Committee on the Bill. Lord ELLENBOBOUGH was of opinion, that their Lordships had an eirial right to move for omis- ' sions as for insertiodsi when proceeding to Coat - mittees on Bills. The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, the usage was that in a Bill before the House, a Noble Lord might move for the introduction of a new clause, or even of a new principle; but that the discuision of the clauses of a Hill could not take place upon the question of going into a Committee. Lord ELLENI3QRQUGU objected to the discus sion, because it comprehended the introduction of a new principle. The Earl of HARROWBY also deprecated dis mission, which was nothing but a waste of the time of the House. The LORD CHANCELLOR said a few words that were inaudible below thellar. • The Earl of WESTMORELAND wished to know what were the.legal rights and powers which a hus band should possess over the property of his wife, and what was to become of the proceeds of any sale of her property by him. Suppose that a woman should be possessed of personal property at the time of her marriage, what was to become of it? Was her trus tee to be responsible ?—Was the Bank Director to be responsible for the proceeds of stock disposed of by the husband defesto? In the case of real estate si milar difficulties would arise. It appeared to him that by a certain understanding between a man and his guardian he might not only receive the proceeds of the sale of his estate, but also have his estate hack again. The facilities by which secret marriages could now be effected were notorious, so that to any person so inclined another marriage was practicable even on the very day on which his guardian might commence proceedings for annulling a previous marriage. He should conclude by observing, that if an unhappy young woman should make a mistake .in her own age, or the number of witnesses who had been pre sent at the marriage of her parents, she was without a remedy in case her husband should take advantage of any one of these grounds, and seek to have the marriage declared void. For these reasons he (Lord Westmoreland) should oppose the clause. Lord ELLENBOROUGH hoped the Noble Earl would not divide the House upon the clause. Al though he should not say that the Bill was perfect, yet he would support the motion for its being com mitted. He pledged himself, however, to object to the Bill, if, on its coming out of the Committee, that clause should still forst. part of it. . Lord POWERSCOUIIT opposed the Bill. The House then resolved itself into a Committee on the Bid.—Several clauses were agreed to. Upon the clause being put which authorized the publication of bruins. its c • Toe Bishop of CHESra s s ' aid... that although be was.oue of the lasz.persona I. the world who would encroach upon the tights of incumbents, yet, as much advantage would arise from the proposed clause, he pat ish situate for at least lfteen days. ' Lord ELLENBOROUGH contended that with the proposed omission the clause would be extremely unjust —The Amendment was negatived and the clause agreed to. The Marquis of BUTE moved, that at the end of each year an authenticated list of the persons married in Chapels should be transferred to the parish Church, and registered in the parish books. After a few words from Lords STOWELL, LIVER•. POOL, and REDLIDALT, and the Bishop of Cnzstn, , in opposition to the motion, The Marquis of BUTE, yielding to the arguments of Noble Lords, consented to withdraw his motion. He was of opinion that it would be a matter of con venience if marriages were to be registered in the pa rish books, in the manner which he had proposed. The clause which declared Ministers not punish able for celebrating the marriage of minors, not hav ing notice of that fact, was then proposed. After a conversation, in which the Loan CRANCEL• ton, Lords WESTMORELAND and Powaftwoonur, and the Bishop of &imps took part, Lord STOWELL-moved, that on the Ist of No vember the clause should take effect; which amend ment being carried, the clause was agreed to, as were , several others. On the clause which declared marriage void where the parties should not be married in Church, or with out banns or license, being proposed, The LORD CHANCELLOR wished the Clergy man should be relieved from the penalties imposed by the clause. The Earl of WESTIVIORELAND opposed the clause. • The LORD CHANCELLOR said, it would be almost impossible for the Clergyman to have the knowledge requisite to enable him to avoid incurring the penalties of the clause. No doubt the Clergyman Ought to take special care to be informed of the si tuation of the parties; but on the otherland, the no lice ought to be so framed as to give him full know ledge of the necessary particulars. Since he came into the office which be had the honour to hold, se ,era' Clergymen had applied to be relieved from pe mashies which they had innocently incurred. Lord ELLENBOROUGH concurred in the sug gestion of the Noble and Learned Lord. The Earl of LIVERPOOL entirely agreed with his. Noble and Learne4 Friend, and thought the no tice bught to be dated. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that marriages Wok place daily without any uptice being given. In the time of his predecessor, some of the most respect able Clergymen of the day applied to him for relief, and were informed by that Learned Lord that the publication of the banns by them was evidence of I their having wilfully disobeyed the Act of Perlin meat. He (Lord Eldon) thought the Clergyman ought to be relieved. The ARCHBISHOP of CANTERBURY sup- ported the arguments of the Noble and-Learned Lord, and supposed a case where a Clergyman might be• called upon, for the first time, to publish banns, and *ho, from inexperience, was unable to discover that the necessary forms had been attended to. The clause, with the proposed amendment, wil l then agreed to. The next clause proposed was, that the marriages of minors might be declared void within twelve months from their solemnization. The ARCHBISHOP of irCatit had last year de dared it as his opinion- that marriages duly r,olem• nixed ought not to be broken. At the commence ment of tire marriage ceremony, the parties are ie. lemnly asked by the Clergyman whether they know of any lawful impediment to their marriage? and on their answer depended whether the marriage should or should not be celebrated. In order to render a marriage perfect, there must exist no lawful impedi ment to it. To apply those principles to the clause then under consideration of the Committee he had great objection to make the marriage of minors void. in point of morality, such a declaration tended to produce injury to society; affecting at the same time the parties in a peculiar and severe manner. It was calculated to-encourage dissolute minors to seduce women under the garb of matrimony. Looking it the question as afibeting the &grafts& marries es of minors, what would be the state of suspense and anxiety in which the parties would remain for twelve smooths, lest their marriages should or should not be a settlement for life? He would most willingly sup port any measure haring for its object the prevention of marriage by minors abort of annulling a froxejide marriage. On the whole of the case, painful as it was to him to object to any part of a Bill that had re ceived the high sanction of his Noble and most elo quentPriernd, yet he feltit his duty to oppose this clause. The Earl of ILO6SLYN moved, that the Chai do report progress, and ask leave to sit again on Thursday, for the purpose of discussing the clause. The Earl of LIVERPOOL opposed the motion, as inconvenient. The Bishop of CHESTER oppose& the dense. It appeared to him that the marriage contrestwos not only a religious but a-civil contract. It was refialk inasmuch as the parties pledged themselves re. Goo that nothing but death shenlsl sewage them.. The law of the land declared that insevisetes should be celebrated in church, and directed oche; forms..— It, therefore appeared to him that persona were bound to obey all the laws of the load, with. rasped to the marriage state, as far as these went not sum trary to the law of GOD. it appeared to him the tin clause then before the Committee vies watt " to the spirit of our religion, and mold net Heelers be binding. Our Divans LIKMMIJITQA bag- madames man should leave his father and mot** and elenatti onto his wife, iitti :ll - meaning uf those Our 7 swayigr PmaPtit when - the laws _....stages of minors by banns invalid. These derations, among many others, compelled him to object to this clause, and to tern the Divine pre cept, es Those whom Goj has joined together let not luau put asunder." 'The LORD CHANCELLOR said, according to the doctrine laid down by the Right Reverend Pre• late who had just sat down, all marriages celebrated in pursuance of the Act of 1756 were not valid, be cause by that Act additional ceremonies were re quired to make good a marriage solemnised in the way usual before the passing of that Act, and mar riages which were then considered solemnized accord ing to the law of Goa. The question here was trot whether Parliament could Kat asunder those whom GOD had joined together; bat the. question was, how were the parties joined put asunder? He did not think the Right Reverend Prelate could find in the Old or New testaments any passage which precluded society from ordering the observance of certain forms at the solemnisation of marriage. If there was a passage which could bear such a coc struction, he must say that there was not a Christian nation upon earth which was not most inexcusable t . because there was not a Christian nation which had not frequently prescribed certain forms for the so-1 lemnization of marriage. He did not believe even that the law of the Church declared that society could not prescribe what *forms they pleased. He wished the Right Reverend Prelate would reconsider the conclusions to which his reasoning would lead, and be was satisfied that the Right Reverend Prelate, for whose opinion he (the Lord Chancellor) enteitained the highest respect, would see that his reasoning• would warrant conclusions which he had never con.. templated. He should not at present give any opi nion upon the clause itself, but should wait to hear the opinions of those Noble Lords who were better acquainted with the subject than he was. Every Noble Lord who had spoken, spoke with great ten-- dcrness of the seduction of the female ; but he thought that the seduction of the male deserved some consi 'deration ; and he could assure Noble Lords, that if they had the opportunities which the office which he had the honour to fill gave him, they would find in stances of seduction by a female not unusual. He would suppose the case of a bricklayer's daughter of $2 Years of age, who, having half a dozen of mate children, should seduce a minor, aged 17, the son of a person of large fortune, and he would ask Noble Lords would not such a case deserve grave consideration? He wished that Noble Lords would turn their minds to the- consideration of male seduc- tion, and they would then be of opinioe, that male minors were entitled at least to some protection. He would conclude by saying again, that if the doc trines maintained by the Right Reverend Prelate were to be acted upon, nine-tenths of the present Bill must be struck aut. The Bishop of CHUM said that he admitted the laws of man were to regulate marriage, when those laws did not oppose the laws of Poo. The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, after the fullest consideration which he was , able to give this clause, he must confess that the opinion which he entertained last year was unchanged. His objection to this clause was not a religious, but a moral objection. He agreed with the Right Reverend Prelate that marriage was an institution of Gel), but he was certain the Scrip tures left it to every country to prescribe the forms to be observed., Upon moral grounds hi would ratter make marriages easy than difficult. He thought the Noble Lord who framed this clause had, by wishing to avoid the difficulty of nullity, fallen into a greater difficulty. If the clause were to declare that mar riages not solemnised with certain forms were null hid void, it would be intelligible; but he thought it ghly preposterous to introduce actlause which placed 'parties who had gone to the altar in such a situation that they could not say for some time whether they Were married or not. He knew that voidability was not * innovation, because, according to the old law, con songuinity was a ground of voidability; bat he would 4 1 .1 p. _that he had never spoken to a man who con ired. the *abject that did not say that the law ought ko be altered in that respect. The object of this those, it was said, was to uphold parental authority. Re ha - 1 as anxious a wish as any Noble Lord to up held parental authority, but for that purpose be khought this clause nugatory, whilst there was no Clause declaring that marriage contracted in Scot land, on the Contineot, or in cos:Nuance: of the pub lieatjon.of banns. was voidable. He agreed with the Noble and Learned Lord that soma consideration ought to be had for the seduction of males by females; but their Lordships ought to guard against the greater evil; and he believed that N o ble Lords would agree with hint, that in 19 cases out of Ile the. seducer would be found to be a male. He felt strongly for a parent or a guardian, but he was satisfied that, p. nerally speaking, whets a marriage was once solem tined, less evil, would arise from declaring it iudia 'soluble lima from declaring it voidable ; and balsas -also satisfied, that it would 'be acting more humanely 'towards parents and guardians not to give them thil ;power of making. marriagervalid or voidable; as ;for his own port he declared; that if he - were plead ill the situation of .a parent or a guardian c;e11111 1 Owed by this dew" he should rather not have the optioa. 'Under all the circumstances, be thought it 'better to revert to what Was - the old Marriage Law ,of this country,, what was the Marriage Law of all r inteign gauntries, and what is the Marriage tow of skit country at that pelmet day. Ha would hare 110 1 objection to the itstroduetiou of a slam, declaring' that the potion - Cbntracting marriage with a female rainurehasild not sadeivoa shilUttg Dna Aaiun. ; but to a dare giving a third.parson power to seallevoisi a nssierir e r f ly solemnized. he would never ussiga uscourr alio opposed the &lilt Archbishop of CAIITERSURV denied that was as sting eentraty4ta the spirit. of Oasis. *helms:4N 'which, bessiaver,-bewaseithers to, as to wish to maintain it egaiesilinvisiiik .louse. His only object in supportintifi s maintain the authority of parents. Marriage was ian with respect to his Owl rove ti en o f. t.e which it should be celebrated. REDESDALE contended, also, that ma-. 'as a regulation made by man, and then tim e , le it as expedient as possible to thr•ir °scope ? ... state of society. Wet it then expedient to dis, tarriages contracted by minors? There ss ai in the law of Cioo - vrhieft preveeted eking at and regulating those thing s vh i g h be injurious to itself, to the morality of the L i te. ple, or to the patties themselves, who had contiactsi that marriage. Under all circumstances, he thn u p that much inconvenience would arise from m t ia; marriages, when once solemnized, voidable. lk Lord ELLENBOROUGH was of opilli,:n, JT4 all the Select Committee had divided on this th ekt„ it would not have found. its way into the was matter of regret and astonishment, that tharee k Reverend Prelate should not have given the eli t i r better • consideration; and especially that he shoul i b now wish the House to adopt it; when, last ye at , cording to the ordinary reports which got 414,,14 their Lordships' proceedings ~ he declared. it to* contrary to morals and religion. The. Archbishop of CANTER BUlt Y %vat not big ot ., ted to this clause, but he was determined to opp ot that which was to be proposed instead of it.. Lord ELLENBOROUGH contended that ix% much easier to contract a clandeStine martiqe by banns than by heave. The Bishop of LONDON maintained that then was nothing in theclause inconsistent with the Chris tian religion or morality. Lord SIDMOUTH, as a Member of the Commi t . tee, agreed in the defence that had heen made for this clause. It was impious to conceive that such marriages were made by Goo, which were the tin; of fraud, forgery, and perjury; and it was only mar. riages contracted by these means that this Llanseptu. posed to render null. He was astonished to learn .much commiseration for utfortunate females by those who wished to make the %%moan re:,.ain torrite t h e w if e of convicted felon, if her mat iage was contracted through fraud, forgery, anti prijor Lord ELLENBOROUGH explained. Mocha been a feeble attempt to defend this clause; but mute to prove that it would nut be complaely nugatory, and be evaded easily, wherever there was any dispo. sition to do so. Lord POWERSCOURT again opposed the ..lance. Lord STOWELL said, the wholeof our Marriage Laws had taken care to provide for the strengthen. ing of the parental authority over the younger branches of mankind. At least this had beau the case silicsOle Reformation ; it was a role laid, down by our illus. thous Reformer Cranmer, and prevaLed in every Protestant country in Europe, except Scotland, which adhered to the rule of the ancient religion of the country. By the present law a marriage was null and void, however soleronlyar religiously celeirratetf, unles it was preceded by the legal form of banns o f license. The Committee found there were but foot modes of going to work, namely—trullity;• a liming ; preventive measures ; fourth would have been throwing the reins on the necks ofthe youth of both sexes. Nullity and the last were boak out of the question. It was desirable that the Mio riage Laws -of this country should be uniform; and that there should not be ome for the rich and ano. they for the poor. He had seen many fathers chose happiness had been blasted by having sons enteric* infamous connexions, by which their prospects in life were utterly destroyed. The natural modesty of the see, their retirement with their mothers, *spa young women to fewer snares and temptations that fell to the lot of young men living at College, or is business, at a distance from their parents and frieadi ' The Committee then divided— For the Nullity Clause Against it - - - - sit Majority against it - - —6 The other clauses were then agreed to, with mom verbal amendments, and the House adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMON& Mr. LINDSAY presented a Petition from the Hoe. Jais Lindsay, l'roptietor of a small island, lying off Guernsey, miles that he, the . Petitioner, Lad a large quantity of g ra nit e sten ti &pose of, which he could sell cheap ; and praying, that tar attention of the. Loudon Bridge Committee might be distal to she subject. Returns of the amount of British Shipping, and its ROO employed for the last dune years; distinguishing each yeas l the Import and Hapset Trade of the United Kingdom, mse dared to be laid before the Howe. Mr. WALLACE presented the Repoli of the Pon* 'Dab Cotnnauter.a.Ordered to be rioted. Mr. T. COURTHRAY gave node% that he nose, tear revs, Move for haves to Icing In a Bill, to akar, awed. Wm" mildew the alinkrupa Laws. . vs. Mr. WILMOT HOILTON presented papas sod mirMille Correspondence relative to the Island of Cuba, whir seminillr COUNTY 000111 TS SILL. Lord ALIIISORPS moved the Order of die Mar for the House goina into a Committee on the COSSIF Courts Bill. The Noble Lied observed, dials moving to fill up the blanks in this Hilt, he d:midis the limits of the Courts Jurisdiction at W. ilaid of 151. as he had at first.propose4; not but he was fully persuaded all the arguments. in favour of thr Bill would apply as well to 151. as la; bat would not risk - his Bill by taking too much atoms. If the machinery of the Bill 'was found to wave, it would be easy to increase the sum..' This Bill was dm coauniuecl, the blanks El* :NU the Report received, amid ordered to be takeniebrio they consideration on Tuesday belt. JOIOT TENANCY BILL. • Mr. DOMINICK BROWNE moved theaaki the Day for the third reading of theJoinifesei J Mr. H'UTCHINSON.. complained of ti n having been brought forward at, s q fates posoda , the Session. The object of this Bill was melbas great change in the situation and Constitutioa of kw Fanscr; whether that change would baloadelital otherwise, he couldnot take on himself to Oa: ibis*, was it necessary he should do so .oa-60"4:0400e 410 'r sion. Rethought his Hon. Friend.sol4d 0,1 1 1910 11 t Bill as perfect as possibly Red, ITMer t ' isso c't shotight It should be printed and the dotmtry, and afford' in d ie Juries and other budir4- ‘ as, ycl; abl#RlVEtir closiernod. o give mitt. -1:"1)$ Lord MILTON and Mr. DANOWEIN Bill, which -was read a ddriPriintraskbprlig'" l Astogrbi•taurttur un onto sit i gto 1k .1; NEWIORT akidabilliedsag. whether he intended, in the course of the Sis#l l l9 ll bring under the consideration of the House Chetri;f• = would supporritOutbeiriAloweaur f to ow* et a co :taos an opportunity ' _.. , eft to m: first i rer • v i t ioh oseqp . .' I prim • might nos to meet tisfu '4, 01 , Cir fkrms in .... sno-1, .. op.ort - hoped and' . rt their geglohipkwhheid to 40 so, •Sti. • • Lord A i llita l t. qty's • ... • d illpu se stout give'. *tort conside. hid iscbubjaction that miters *ethos intofeanrier riago was far; .. 1 to'the*.opiiiikl amendriehle4l went to ihoeld.he punished by picanioty Sees, or erferf 940- foreenadi a er deprive'fncumbenti 4 their verig_hts; &claims of property; bat' he Could zterersckuslOt t 0 ticolar st; law.. Lord REDESDALE thought the Qapelry ought the passing of this clause, because it was contrary to solve our use d to be annexed to the Chapel. The paities who were the law d` Goa;. and he also opposed this clause be- nothing i iblic to be allowed to publish banns in Chapels ought to cause it introduced an anomaly, namely, that the from 100 l had be residents of the parish in which the Chapel was •eorriages of minors by license were valid, but the might be margin ads: a sitifinra hr banns invalid. These consi- ale. or to is ;Os. Nothing could he more ileac dullish' Letti og of those vror‘ of one Doman iqu. Tbs Li rivet Legislator .aid a mawought sotto pot *we was his wik, e , for adultery. Afmr. Album dimity in its, be mast, that awrisjiikart hied treaded solemnized according to the laws Of Csrho ands of die Ho ws of man, and he, therefore, thought a law 'to moist& ~~.~. ~-: