The Statesman. — London, England, 1822-07-13 00:00:00

•i the Home Department would be able to snake some Wis• factory statement on this subject. Mr. Secretary PEEL said he had mad* some inqui ries ion this case which bad been satisfactory. He had a certificate from the surgeon who admitted this man 'after his dismissal. from which it clearly appeared that the immediate canse of his death was immoderate drink ing on the day of Isis leaving gaol, bet his death did not occur till s fortnight afterwards. He believed there was another charge in the petition of his having received as husk money prior to his resitting the gaol. Upon inquiry into this, he found that this was a sum given him in consideration of service regniarly performed in the kitchen, and in corroboration he found that an en. try had bees made of it in the books. With regard to his being washed with cold water, he learned that it was the custom to wash all the prisoners upon their coining iota the gaol, and that the water used was warm. After a few words from Mr. Dawson and Mr. Btu- NET, the Petition was ordered to be laid on the table. THE DON/GALL ESTATES. The SOLICITOR GENERAL presented a Petition from an individual of the name of Arthur Chichester, setting forth, that by the will of his grandfather lie was entitled to inherit the estates of the Donegal' family, in consequence of Anna May, silted the Marchioness of Donegal!, not having been legitimately married to the hfarqoess, by which it happened that there could be no lawful heir male from that union; and that is eons.- quence of a clause introduced into the Marriage Act Amendment Bill he should be deprived of his just right, isa the marriage between Anna Mar and the Marqness of Donigsll, which would otherwise have been soli and void, would be rendered valid. He complained of her - lug been involved in expensive litigation to maintain hie jest rights, and stated that the case was at present P ia course of judicial investigation, and it would there fore lie doing what was unprecedented in the annals of British Legislatioa to pass this Bill, which was an ex peel feet. law to deprive him of his vested rights, and strip him of property to which by the bequest of his grandfather he was entitled by law. Per these reasons, therefore, he prayed to be heard by Counsel against the particular clause at the Bar of the House. The Hon. and leaned Gentlemen observed that if the allegations were true, end . 11.2 believed they were matter of notoriety, this Gentleman bad the same right to the estates In question as tin,. by which Member of that house enjoyed his property, viz. the right given him by the laws of the land. this Bill went to strip him of valua ble estates, which he had the fullest title at the present moment to convey by will, or fee, and under such cir cumstances he apprehended the lionse would not refuse to allow him to be heard by Counsel at the Bar. He would refer to a precedent which had been talked of. He alluded to the case of Mr. Wright, who had brought three or four hundred actions against clergymen for non-residence, at a time that • Bill was pending to change that part of the law. It was conceived at that time that he had a vested right in the penalties which the law ordained should he levied for non•residence, and safely this petitioner's right was much stronger. He was heard with great . patience by the House of Lords noon that occasion, in support of Mr. Wright's claim, and although it was decidedly against him, it-was con eitlered saint to do that which would go to deprive an individual of his vested rights without bearing him.— Mr. Chichnter thought that if the house resolved upon depriving him of valuable property, they ought to de vise some means of compensation, and he Impel the boasts would allow him to be heard by Counsel. Mr. SCARLETT thought it impossible to grant the prayer of the petition at this stage of the m . It was net now their business to alter the form of the Bill, but to entisider the Amendments sent down to them from the Lords; he must say that it was rather remarkable this petition was not preferred before.—(Hear!)—He could not but consider that the object of it was to pro cure delay, at the lame time that he thought they coed not non entertain inch a prayer. Dr. LUSHINGTON observed, that the first Amos& meat which he had to consider was one which went to affect property in the way complained of by this rd. tiooer. Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH hoped the house would not suffer its coarse to be impeded by the late applies , lien, when there had been ample time to present it be fore both to that House and to the House of Lords. said ',untainly this was not a more fitting time than before. state all the Amendments of the Lords went to narrow Ibileetrospective operation of the Bill. • There had been • Tedtine presented to the Lords but it did not pray to be heard by Counsel at the Bar. What then could be the meaning of this application but to delay the Bill that it might eventually be lost for this Sessiou at least, against the deliberate determination of both houses of Parliament? Above all things this was a Bill which, out of regard fur the peace of families, and their dearest interests ought not to be delayed. It was, therefore, from the same sense of public duly, that bad caused him to vote for the Bill, that lie opposed Counsel deing heard upon it, !wing convinced that it was only an expedient to defeat the intention of the Legislature by delay.— (Hear, hear.) Mr. B. BATHUItST agreed with the Honourable Members on the other side, that it 'wu too late now to he heard by Petition against the Bill in its present state. He believed also that the Petition was directed against some of the amendments which had been sent down to them, from the House of Lords, and in that case be believed the Chair would inform them that such a course could not be taken as that prayed for by the Peti tioner. He rather thought too that it was too late for a Petition to he received sow. The SPEAKER said it was inconsistent with the practice of the hone to receive Petitions against mew sores whirls hail ' been passed. With regard to the prayer of this Petition, he apprehended that tho house could not hear Counsel against measures of which they were not masters. That house bed passed the Bill. If the Petitioner, therefore, directed Isis complaints against the amendments of the Lords, lie believed it was nithout arceetletst for the home to bear Counsel fur 'nett a purpole.—(Hear, hear ) :dr. BERNAL presented a Petition from William Pi reharti. Fem. Proctor, on behalf of Samuel Blithe, at present in Paris, praying that the Marriage. Act Amend ment Bill might nut be passed into a law in its prescu. state.--Laid on the table. Dr. PHILLIMORE presented a similar Petition on behalf of Sarah Blithe. Her Proctor stated that she was 'carried on the false oath of her husband, by licen.e, that she was pregnant by him at the time, a n d wot gum pregn int, and out of tier scenes, from the conduct of her linahand's father. Dr. LUSHINGTON having been Counsel in this ease, felt himself called upon to put the house in possession of the real facia. This Sarah Blithe was maid servant in the family of the father she complained of, when she married the young man. They were married at Dover epos his false oath, he being IS. and she 2t. The fa ther had caned the marriage to be set aside, but an ap peal bad been made, and be was very much inclined tp think, that as this had suspended the Jedgitieut declaring the marriage null and void, it was one of those eases which the clause complained of would make a valid mar riage. Tt 4 Petition was then read and laid on the table. OJANCIDY Mims. Mr. BROUGHAM presented a Petition from Thome. Flanagan, Gent. of Paley-place. The situation of this Geniuses of which. he came to complain to the house was wet • peculiar sae; for it was a case of ruin from being 'evolved in a Chancery suit.—(Laughter.) He lied Wee reined by the decision in his ease, but he was z. l . i . .: ~ . , . 4 . 1 . 1 : 1 f i , ' ! f . , . ,-. , , 1 ;1 , : 1 , • ~ ~ .. t I ° - ; i el 1 ', \ - . ' 1 t . 1 ii:. : ,.. 1 • , ~..'..; • , ~. ; • . . i' ;... ti. i. t` l', i 0 . , . '- • 1. i V , 1 i 4 f. 0 , I , • i ~ , ~..., .... I pi.. ..:, ;....,.. ..•,, ~s r ' ~.... is , ' 4., , ' ~,',.. ,:,, ..._,. :-.... { 1 i . , Y om= STAIIESIVIA. were made beta eon the years he had gamed by the parties merely ruing before a Justice of the Peace to els tete his sanction to their anion. Those marriages were esologlitedly null and void, but the Legislature, by • re trospective law bail decided or making them good. An other case in point was the law respecting the marriages of Priests. These by the COlOlOOO law had been null sod void, their offspring illegitimate, and property which otherwise would have devolved to them they were in capable of enjoyisg. A law, however, passe to make these marriages valid, and mbeequeetly soother to re move all reproach from the offspring of tech marriages, and to reptile them to inherit property. These cases the Honourable and Learned Beatlenslo opposite said were different from those affected by the Marriage Act. When he called for precedents, the Learned Gentleman was not content with similarity, but looked for identity. It was, however, the principle of the laws to which he bad referred that they were to look to, and that wu suf ficient to justify the present Bill so farm precedent went. The Bill now before the Hens* got rid of the perpetual nullity of the Marriage Act, which wu at variance with all the analogies of our law, which precludes even time from giving security to property, and indicted evils which might go on from generation to generation, con tinually increasing in geometrical proportion. It had been proposed to the Rouse of Lords to render mar riages valid and their issue legitimate, but to take away the right of such parties to inherit property. The woman wu to he a wife in all other rights, but she was not to claim a dowry t and berchildren, who were to be legitimatised by birth, were to have DO claim epos the property of their parents. This was the first time that a distinction Itetween right and property bad ever been recognised in English law. Yet this bad been thought f. +d enough to be proposed to the consume seem of ' their Lordships. By passing the Bill as it sow stood, the Peers of England raised the high character which they had already enjoyed in the , pinion of the peo , ple, as the constant protectors of the public good. The Right Honourable and Learned Oentlenian concluded by declaring his aneions hops for the some's' of the llill amid the loudest and long continued cheering. Mr. HUDSON GURNEY objected to the retrospec tive clause, but thought the general operation of tbe Bill entitled it to the support of the Houses Mr. WETHERELL opposed the Bill. He did not be lieve that the retrospective clause would have an exten sive operation, but it could produce nothing but mis chief and Injustice. They hail beard of the practice of canvassing for votes upon private Bills, and that was bad tomb ; but until the present measure was pro posed, be never heard of canvassing for vortis upon • question affecting the most important interests of the public. It was notorious, too, that this cue had an as pect to a particnlar case now adder litigation.—(Hear, bear.) —What he would ask, was the old law, which this Sill was intended to replace? Was it not franked by Lord Hardwkke, one of the greatest men that ever this emintry produce d ? And was not the present Bill op peed by the Lord Chancellor of the Tear 1822. whose beat learning, and knowledge, and high acquirements, rendered him at least equal if not superior, to his great nor in that office? lie admitted that the feel. , were exposed to deep injury by the op.- i ratios of the existing law, and his mind required no moralising. boannisintiofloence, to make him regret it as deeply as any one; bat such regret would not la; dime ions to throw aside the principles of established* Iww. sad tp disregard the constitutional rights of pro perty. lie could also meet the suppoiters of this Bill up die score of feelings; for although some parties id be relieved from the occurrence of miseries by' sration, vet it would impose on others a degree of ip not less intolerable. He also objected OD such a power in the handset the Crown. as Milt 'ell declaring whether propertyshoeld or should not do. wend to the ebiWren of parties whose marriage Wil kes irregular and contrary to law. What a amintrear power it would be to entrust in the hands of any 'glair ten. He did not think that at present it goad be abused; bet bow liable would it be to abase an* pa dealer circumstances. It was so less a power than that of declaring whether tiseoffspring of marriages should be legitimate or spurious. And might there not be cases of el exactly similar character, in which policy might dictate different courses, while justice demanded an equality of treatment. Thus, with the same rights, one party might ho admitted to the enjoyment of pro perty, while the other was excluded from it. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman argued powerfully against the Bill, awl conjured the House not to pass it with the indecent haste which was now proposed. By a full et amination of the clauses, and the necessary amendments to them being made, he wilds; become reconciled to the principle of the measure. But without ample discussion he thought it impossible that the House should agreed to a Bill containing so many new enactments upon which they had *ever held deliberation. Dr. PHILLIMORE denid that the Bill was intended to apply to a particular case. A Bill was introduced to the house in the year 1817, of a much more retrospective nature than the present; and the case alluded to was not then in existence. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL spoke in opposition to the Bill. He confessed that it appeared to him inex plicable. It destroyed the Act introduced by Lord Hard wicke, bat it left nothing to supply its place. He pro ceeded to point out the hardships which the Bill would entail upon parties affected by its operation, and parti cularly, deprecated the placing at the disposal of the Crown the extraordinary power ofconnuating property for the commission of an illegal act with regard to mar riage. The question for the house to consider was not, as that eloquence of his Right lion. Friend bad endea voured to persuade them, whether a nullity of marriage should be allowed which would produce all the misery and distress which he had described, hut whether they should pass a Bill changing the whole principles of oar marriage laws with such haste as to defy all deliberation, and preclude all discussion. He then proceeded to ex amine the prospective clauses and pointed out the ano malies and blunders which they contained. One pro vided, that if one of the parties were of age, should swear the other was 2/. Then again it was to he ne cessary that a copy of the register of the births of the parties should he produced to the Clergyman. Now it was very well known, that in many cases persons were net registered for mooths, or years after being born.— This would be the case where children were born while their parents were out of the country. So that when the register was produced, the person could not marry, although in fact he might be more titan of age. Ano ther provision was, that the houses of the parties should he affixed to the church doors, and in some conspicuous part within the church.—(A hingh.)—The credit of this, however, did not belong to their Lordships. it was in the clause of his Hon. and Learned Friend. With regard to the retrospective operation of the Bill, he had heard with surprise from his Right Hon. Friend the At. torney-Geeeral for Ireland, that retrospective operation was an ordinary principle of legislation. Now he con fessed that this was contrary to all that ever he bad heard or read. Mr. PLUNKET observed that he did not say se.— What be said was, that in cases affecting property, re trospective enactment was as ordinary principle of le gislation. The ATTORNEY GENERAL said that sat+ enact ments only applied to the particular cues, but this pro position was :or recyjnising the principle is s general and public law. The 'masers of Lord Iludwicke had existed from 1754 down to the present day without any alteration in its principle, and DON it was proposed ail at arm without &liberation and without &mission. ii, change and destroy its principle altogether. If distill should pass.. say rang man of family might mam a prostitute, and parents bave se remedy. Mach 41 been said respecting the punishment of children for o, faults, of their parents. Unfortunately • violation * disregard of the law had that offset, bat it was the , of Eaglisb law to make children gaffer for the . sett of their father. The law of attainder had precisely sk it effect. With respect to property, the House could es, * in its justice deprive persoes of their vested rights. 7%, retrospective douse would unhinge the law of 1754. i t all the statutes existing rights had been strictly s* * *aimed. He called nn the house to pause before sk * passed this Bill. They ought t• consider in what NA their property would stand. This Bill bed hose sad tered io the Hoes* of Lords, that it comedown as ast ir measure, to which, he contended, the Hoses of Comma, seght to withhold their consent. Sir J. MACKINTOSH begged to be Hidalgo' soo the attention of the House for a short lime. It was is cumbeat on him to make a few observations in aim to the speech of his Right Hon. Prised. who ' errs* had spoken with moral courage, which did him Ify greatest honour. He agreed with his Hon. and Lemesi Iffriend, the Member for Oxford, is deprecating my l emmas. with Members of Parliament. to support thole My other measure. He could at least say, no p.m had offered an insult by presuming to canvass bk. Plea years ago, how before be beard of the case whisk bad been so trequeatly alluded to, be felt the injostiss of the Marriage Act. Whets be saw It held a teatime ! to overturn the peace of families, by leading dear Ml titles to destroy wealth, honour, ancf dignity, it oasis possible to say such a law ought to exist. !ferret/p l y against the mode which had been adopted in the di lion on this 'abject. They were to consider the die of the Marriage Act, and think of reformatioo. Honourable Members bad ohjeeted to mosey alteratiso in the Marriage Act by the House of Lords. 'Rs Marriage Act originated in the House of Lords, ant their decision ought to satisfy tha House of Coatroom Decanse the Houle of Peers were eertsialy ietersalei in liking care that persons should sot marry imps petty with Noble Families. The House of Lords ha made the Bill better that it was when is was sent ail. It was one of the most important natters of legidi tioo that could possibly interest the peace and .1. es ne of the people of this country. They but hear el blunders in the Bill with respect to satires on chard doors, but be was convinced there was not a Court., Law that would sot pat a construes:on on that part et the - Bill, deciding that a descriptios of the reside/seed the parties was to be made public. He stood up for the interest of children, sad the smirk" of property. nen were few families in which objections might not sake marriages illegal, and children illegitimate, and that very circumstance proved the necessity for this Bill.- 'rho only way to pot at end to diets doubts in marriages was to pass the Bill, sod give quiet possession. TU was a Bill which sleeted the whole cosntoneity. Eeuy child born, and unborn. Expedience required nons. pection. The peace of families must be set at rest.- They were not to look at law authorities alone on this subject. if they were to inquire what the law oughts be, they were to connect public feeling, and not prefer sloes' opinions. He would oppose legal legielatom to legal petty fogging, and the liability of lawyers. The question was, what the measure was, in legal policy. not what it was with respect to legal opinions. The law as it stood made a divorce between patrimony and matrimony. Retrospection was the verb essence of the Bill, and If they threw the retrospective clause away they might giveup the Bill. Oa. of the greatest ewe menial towns in this kingdom foiesed part of the pm. perry of the funnily which had bees -named in debate aid melees the retrospective clause was retained est sae of the holders of proretty ander that family would he.. a secure title. The Hon. tient. concluded by . sayiselso considered both the prospective and retrespectwoolaille founded la justice. The Marquess of LONDORDERRY eemeested go wally ma the defects, of she Marriage Aet, sod suppsea ed the Bill in its amended form. He thought the sue Hoer of Parliament bad done jestice to the stated pee. Bible extent, without disturbing the rights of pr cluck He felt that this was a most delicate pnaciple of le don: but there were numerous cases Is guide course, and various authorities to sanitise the prieeleb of a retrospective effect in a measure of this naterSe- Considering the extremely vicious principle of the Ad of 1753, he felt himself called epos. after the fullest consideration of its merits, to vote for the Bill as it new stood. Mr. CANNING followed on the same side, and as ▪ the House, that in giving his vote on the person question be was not actuated, either directly or iodi rectly, by any particular case. He felt, however, that unless some greets' measure was adopted, the Hesse was liable to be perpetually involved in cases of particu lar and specific legislation. When be saw no improve ment would be made by great characters is the other House, and when he saw that every improvement wield be opposed there, unless it originated is simian var. ter.-(Hear, hear.)-He welcomed the MI with the bungling alterations made in it, and thanked Provi dence for sending this Bill bask, smelt as It sae, With this %codified and mitigated approbation, be voted for the Bill. The House then divided oa the gisestioa for agreeing to the Lords' Amendments-Ayes, 12E-Nees, 1111-Mo jority, II!. • On oar rotors to the galleryore found tie SPEAKER putting to the vote the clauses seriatim., to which tie House agreed. On the clause A., which went to validate marriages, suits respecting the validity of which had been already instituted, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL proposed on amend ment, to the effect of excepting each marriages from the operation of the Bill. Strangers were ordered to withdraw for a division, but we could not leant the numbers. During our exclusion from the gallery, we understood that all the cl were agreed tooled the Bill passed. The other orders of the day being dispoft , d of, the house, at • Quarter to Three o'clock.-Adjoerned to Monday. Mutant, and Co. sold the Two lint 20,0001. Frites in the last Lottery Contract. Lottery begins Nest !Wide, whoa T•n Capitals are sore to be draws sad may be gained at a trifling risk, as every purchaser may Faintish's Ticket or Sh.ire after taking thaehattee of the first day at a small redu.•tion from the price he gave, vit. only 11. Ifis. on a whole Tirkrt, and fonr shilrtngs on * Sixteenth, other Shares in proportion (if brought ►ack before 2tith ly). IV her . ' i•iintaina tet WOW. 2et 20.0001. i s Se. tee. No• 'no .ilanks to a prise.— Hasa►daad Office% V 3. Royal Exchange-gate; 26, Cornbill, and 1:4. Oxford -street. DIED. Ow Thursday Inst. at the A ttorney-Geoerd's, Whiashall place. London, Mariaaim Eli:abode, Rif* of Monett Langton, Erg. Oa Saturday last. at his house, Newiagtooldsee, Mr. j ta 8 11: L i t s &It i i . n u a l t r i e ta d t, S a i i St. Denis, *obis way to Bodope, in the MY par of his age, Thomas Foster. Esti., of Ella Estate, Jamaica, and formerly of the °rota, Huck- London : Edited, Printed. and Published at the Mee of 66 Tula livavesuss" and 6' The Centesivotten" (S andal Paper. No. V 97, Strand, by R. WARDELL, L whoa all eOnnunications, Orden, t.. are reloaded te Yes addressed. told that he might appeal, bet be was already 'boll) raises' and meld sot avail himself of this means of bet tering himself, which bad he only been half reified by the decision, would have served to complete hill ruin.— tie feared there wet nothhtg in this gentlemaa's cam is whielsihe hoists could most him ; bat they safest do some good if they complied with one ',art n( his pray. r This was, that t hey would revive the practice of the Court of Chancery, and shorten the duration of suits. If Honourable Members would apply themselves to this, instead of getting up ose after another, those who were. and those who were not connected with that Court—to pass labonred rulogiums epos the Judge who hap pened to preside over it at the time, sinus good might he done. The Petition was then read and ordered to be printed. MARILIAGC ACT AMINDICENT BILL. _ On the Order of the Bey for the consideration of the Lords' Amendment to the Marriage Act Amendment Bill being read. Dr. PHI WA MORE congratulated the house upon the successful result of their perseverance in this cause. which the present stage of this Bill presented. This was the fourth Bill that had been sent up to the other house. It hail at length received considerable attention .adequate to the importance of the subject, and be mast say, that the Lords, with the usual zeal of converts, had carried their concurrence with them much farther than he expected. That house had previously distinctly de clared, that there never should be a nullity of marriage. But in the present Dill they hail passed over unnoticed the clause to that effect; and in point of feet, had only expunged one clause, substituting in its place eight others, and these were the amendments they had to cow- Rider. They had also given more extended operettas so the retrospective clause, carrying it bark to apply to marriages of a more ancient date. Bet in all that the Lords had done in this respect, notwithstanding what they had heard that night, be was prepared to contend that they had most scrupulously respected the sacred rights of property. The lion. Gentleman entered into an examination of the different amendments. He re plied to the objections made to the retrospectiveoperatio• of the Bill, and 'hewed that former acts on the subject of marriage, had in the same way been made re trospective.. He moved that the amendments should be read a second time. Dr. LUSHINGTON thought it would be almost no exampled conduct, if the boase should at once agree with what were called the Lords' amendments, which left scarcely 20 lines of the former Bill, and supplied ten pages of their own. He believed no man wba bad read the Bill conlil say that he understood the whole of it. His Learned Friend bad admitted that there was some obscurity in one of the clauses, and of the meet im portant clauses too, as be (Dr. Lashington) would con tend. Was it then fitting that a Bill should ws, of which every syllable ought to be well understood, which was thus defective ? He thought it objectionable, as it went to establish different marriage systems in Ragland and Ireland. No man could be more willing than he was to bind down with iron fetters the man who would effect a marriage by means of a false oath, and after wards take advantage of his own perjury to break it. lint he contended that girls and boys, who might be drawn into marriages, under great disparity of means stances, and who were incapable of judging for them selves, were entitled to protection from the law. He stated several cases in which the operation of the Bill Mould be injnrious. and could have been provided with many morons., had he thought his Listened Friend re quired to be informed of thew. it was necessary to con sider how this measure would affect contingent rights. He was at this moment a trustee, with five or six other individuals, to a property amounting to six or seven hundred thousand pounds. which had bees acquired In the following manner:—Money had been lent_ twenty, four years ago on a reversion then eatumbered col h two' lives. By this bill, a null and void marriage if 'M. hoit taken place, might have been made the means of de priving the claimants of their property, tail of xivilg it to those who could never have been considered entitled to it. In commenting on the penalties incurred by the Surrogate if all the forms prescribed in this bill were not exactly complied with, he having the honour to be Surrogate to the Lord Bishop of London, gave his friends notice that they would all be likely to remain bachelors for him, for be. under such enactments, should he disposed to grant no licence.—(A laugh.)—A certain Noble Lady, it had been rumoured, bad had a great hand in framing this bill. He protested he believed the re port, for ft seemed to him to po much greater indi cations of having emanated from a femioloe rather than a masculine understanding. The provision for making marriages valid that had been celebrated under false names (by which parents and guardians were precluded 'from interference) lie thought highly objectionable. Far tram thinking that this bill ought to pass because l it remedied one evil, and left a variety of ends to be at tended to ata future period, be would call on the house to abide by the ancient law, and resist all innovations. He would say, that no bill ought to pass to alter the law of the land with respect to marriages which that house amid not declare on its honour and its conscience that It fully understood, and had considered with a view to all the consequences to which it must tend. He moved uan amendment, "That the amendments should be read a third time on that day six months." Mr. PLUNKETT thought if they were not to pass any bill, without first being sure of their understanding every syllable or sentence that it contained, the number of statutes annually passed would be diminished. Not professing to understand every sentence, syllable, and iota of this measure, he was nevertheless fully convinced that it would do great and effectual good. It would do away with much injustice and cruelty, and if its opera tion was to be complained of in ion)e instances, the be nefits it would confer were beyond all calculation, while the evils growing out of it were capable of being easily cured. The Learned Gentleman had put the question to an unfair issue. He had called on the house to abide by the ancient law of the land, and resist innovation= lint be (Mr. Plunkett) would call on the Image to. return to the ancient law of the land, and cure the innovations which had already taken place. What was good in the Marriage Art would not be touched, but its object would no longer be defeated b r the oath of the party against whose offending it was meant to guard, and who, carried away by headstrong passion, might be disposed mistreat' to Whit was not true. The consent of parents or guar dians was not to he required, and that verified by the af fi•las its of third persons. The clause of nullity was got rid of which bad heretofore injured those it was meant to protect. Its effect was such, that it could make the oangliter of s noble family a conc ubine, bastardize her issue, and put it out of the power of all her friends to re move the incurable stain. T his monstrous and merci less enactment was now disposed of, and comparing the evil which might grow out of the present measure with the misery which it would slit., be thong ht the house would not hesitate in declaring fur its adoption. It was said to be against the practice of legislation to give this bill a retrospective operation. He denied that such was the fact; for to give a moisture a retrospective action was a regular and an established course. This he in stanced is the Acts respecting Popery. If other prece- dents were asked for he would refer to the bills of Lord Hertford and Bishop Horsley, which had been mention ed by his Learned Friend who bad entitled himself to the gratitude of his country by the introduction of this bill. He also mentioned the Ilith oft:bade& 11., 'Webbed legalized all marriages which bad been celebrated be tween the years 1642 and 1660. Wbea the *Simonete circumstances arose between the Kittle sad the Par liament, which led to a revolution, levy marriage. iy t►,. . .._..: . ~~--, i INNEN MM. 3 do I of bilk vas Vie 4•••• Yd ton gen Iris .Cu i.Pc Ta. ow' teri Imo tees C ita elm Sher rell 60