The Press.
London, England, 1855-03-17 00:00:00

MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S
SISTER.

This subject came before the Commons on Tues-
day, in a debate which turned on the interpretation
of a verse in the Bible, and the theological con-
sideration as to whether it applied to Christians.
Mr. HEYWOOD introduced it, asking for leave to
bring in a bill to abolish the prohibitory act of 1835.
He commenced by saying that in 1852 685 widowers
had married their deceased wives' sisters. The law
only pressed upon the poor; the rich evaded it by
going abroad, where the law did not exist, and there
marrying. The law was especially tyrannical to
certain classes of dissenters and Jews, and was
opposed to the sentiments of a large number of the
clergy of the Establishment. He quoted Sir W.
Jones and others against the interpretation of the
verse in Leviticus, which is supposed to prohibit
such marriages.
Sir F. THESIGER said that the women of England
were opposed to any alteration in the law. He then
entered at large into the scriptural argument, with
some allusion to hi.torical instances.

Mr. BOWYER said that these marriages were not
void at common law, but only in the ecclesiastical
courts. He considered the Legislature wrong in
placing any obstacle in the way of marriage except
when there was a clear violation of morality.
Mr. E. Ems, argued upon the interpretation on
the text of Leviticus, contending that it did not mean
a prohibition.
Mr. M. MIr.NE said that the law had not arrested
these marriages, which had rather increased. The
most painful consequence would follow on the suc-
cession of property if the Legislature refused to alter
the law. It was a matter to the middle classes of
life and death, and to be considered as a pressing
practical matter, and not in an archaeological light.
Mr. It. PHILLIMORE opposed the bill, which he
said would disturb the relations of families, and in-
flict great injustice on those who had kept the law.

Mr. SPOONER supported the alteration believing
the present law to have a most demoralising effect
on the lower classes. These marriages were cele-
brated, the couple quarrelled, and the man turned
his wife out of doors, dishonoured and without a
home.

Mr. H. DRUMMOND said that while they were about
it " you had better abolish all the prohibited degrees
and marry your grandmother like a man."
Lord PALMERSTON said that he should vote in
favour of the motion. Parliament itself had decided
against the abstract principle that these marriages
were repugnant to the law of God. The moral
feeling at large was not in unison with the law, it
was constantly violated, and great social evils thus
existed.

Mr. WALPOLE protested against the consequences
of such a line of argument. He deprecated the
agitation of the question as most injurious ; it destroyed
the familiarity of domestic relations, was admitted to
be contrary to the feelings of Ireland, of Scotland,
and, he believed, of a majority of this country. He
argued that the unmarried aunt would be fur every
reason a better guardian of the children of her late
sister than the married one.
Mr. MooRE declared that Roman Catholics looked
upon the proposal with horror.
Mr. COBDEN pointed to the fact that a man in
society might go to Germany, marry his deceased
wife's sister, and return home without losing caste,
as an evidence of the general feeling on the subject.
The motion was carried by 87 to 53.