The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1859-03-29 00:00:00

Emperiat Varliamrnt.

- - -0.- -

HOUSE OF LORDS.-TITESDAY.

Lord Wow:House moved the second reading of the
Bill to legalise Marriage with a Deceased Wife.% Sister.
Lord DUNG AN NON moved that the Bill be read a
second time that day six months.
Lord ALUKNABLE thought the chapter in Leviticus
showed clearly the erroneous grounds on which the
canon referred to had been founded. Ile voted for the
measure because he thought it would prevent gross
immorality on the part of the .our.
The Bishop of bxETES regretted that from his age lie
WWI incaptble of taking a prominent part in this tine
, cushion. In answer to the list of Ilishopi cited by Lord
Wont:not:se, tie asked how many Bishops hail there
been from the beginning of the Church atrain4 it? lie
should oppose the Bill solely on religious gr ttttt ails, and
maintained that it lIVIS solely e religious, and MA a social
question.
Lord Sr. LyoNantni said that the measure of leA5
had sufficiently shown what the intention of Parliament
was on these marriages ; and if that were so, people who
contracted these marriages did AU fully aware that the
ceremony was illegal, and the Dane illegitimate.
The Bishop of Sr. ASAP.' Uplaated the NU because he
thought it contrary to the law of (hod.
Lord Li noun explained why lie intended to vote in
favour of the Bill, having on previous occasions voteti
whoa it.
Lord ra ccwoern thought the great difference of
opinion which existed on this question was a strong
argument against the Bill. Ile opposed the Bill on
purely social ground..
The Bishop of Cone supported the Bill.
The Mallet, of trr. Davin's looked with alarm at the
consequences which would ensue if this measure became
law.
The Bishop of thrum) denieii that the principle of
the Bill was either to be found in the Ohl or New Testa.
sent. lie explained the steps that had been taken by
the Bench of Binhops imm 1535 in legalising marriages of
this kind that hail been contracted up to that time. He
asserted that, from inquiries he hail caused to be maile,
li, was convinced that this Bill Was not desired by the
Law, but by the middle classes, awl he beimught their
Lonbillips not to relax Umlauts of thin country in accord-
mice with the wishes of Chow who desired to exchange
the restraint* of morality for those of license.
The Bishop of Canist.e, from his own experience,
knew that these marriage* were denireil by time poor,
all.l not only among the poor but among other classes.
He hail felt it lately hia duty to call upon une of his
clergy to vacate his living on account of having con-
tracted one of these titanium
Lord Worwitouse, in reply, explained that Scotland
was not included in the present hill beCallae it bad not
been included in the marriage law of 1143.). As to
Ireland. he ahould be most happy in committee to extend
it to that country.
On &division for the second reading the numbers were
, —Contents, 39 ; nomm-cumikuts, 49. 3o the Hill was
lost.

TIRT RSDAY.

Lord THURLOW took the Oaths and his scat on Ids
succession to the title.

Lord ELI.64IIOIIOUGH, in moving for certain papers
relating to India, gave notice that he should call the
attention of the House on Friday to the state of the
Indian money-market.
On the order of the day for going into Committee on
the recommitment of the Trading Companies' Winding-
up Bill,
Lord DONOUGHMORIS, in answer to Lord Grey, said
that since the passing of the Limited Liability Act, in
114.15, 1,09 S companies, with a collective capital of
1:75.442.587, had been registered under that Act. Out
of these between GO and 70 had ceased their operations,
and the remaining 1.030 had at present A capital of
upwards of £Ati,OIX.MSXX It was his opinion that the
Act had exhibited little practical result.
Lord Ovular)Ng wished to know how much of the
capital of these companies had been paid up. Pre-
vi ____ sly to the passing of the Limited Liability Act, in
Ws", he had pointed out the fraudulent practices which
the Act would develop, and the result had justified his
prediction, for out of 1,0011 companies between 110 and 71)
' had been already wound it. The Act was founded on
dishonest principles, and he should oppose it on every
occasion.
Lord STANI.V.v of A I.DritLFA thought the speech of
Lord Overstone calculated to allay rather than increase
anxiety as to the working of the Limited Liability Act.
lie was in favour of the Bill.
Lord Gum' could not agree with Lord Stanley of
Ablerley. He hoped the statement of Lord Overstune
would prevent individuals from putting any confidence
in j !stock companies of I led liability.
The Marquis of CLAxittetitim considered Lord Grey's
denunciation of the principle of limited liability not
founded on justice or experience. Ile considered the
Bill before ths House an excellent Bill.
The Bill then passed tl-rough Committee.
Several Bills were then read a second time, and reports
on others received.
The Manor Courts (Ireland) Bill was road a third
time and passed.
The House adjourned at 7 o'clock.