The Press.
London, England, 1857-08-22 00:00:00

817

temperate manner. This amendment involved two
propositions,—first, that innocent parties should be
compelled to marry before the registrar ; secondly,
that marriage celebrated in facu Ecclesia was in the
eye of the Church to he regarded as indissoluble. He
pointed out the social evils which would be the prac-
tical consequences of adopting the amendment, and
recommended that it should be withdrawn, and that
the great question, whether or not the clergy of the
Church of England should be exempted from the
obligation to marry divorced parties, should be raised
in another form, and be tried and decided upon the
amendments of which Mr. Walpole and Major War.
burton bad given notice, and which distinctly raised
that simple question.
The amendment was ultimately withdrawn.
Major WARBURTON moved a proviso at the end
of the clause, "That no priest or deacon shall be
liable to any suit, penalty, or censure for solem-
nising, or refusing to solemnise, the marriage of
any person who shall be divorced by virtue of the
act."

In the course of the discussion of this amend-
ment,
Mr. WALPOLE, who urged very strongly that Par-
liament had no right to put an undue strain upon
the conscience of any party, and to place him in the
dilemma of being compelled to obey or disobey one
of two laws, earnestly appealed to the Government to
acquiesce in the amendment.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he was authorised
by Lord Palmerston to propose a qualified accept-
ance of the amendment; but before he stated the
terms, he set before the committee the considera-
tions that had weighed greatly with the Govern-
ment, and avowing that he gave way not upon
conviction, but in deference to those who deeply
felt that the interests of the Church of England
would be promoted thereby, be warned the house in
a very solemn and impressive manner of the evils
that might follow in the train of this amendment.
Assuming, however, that the house would well weigh
the matter, the Government were willing, if a great
majority were in favour of the amendment, to con-
sent to a proviso in these terms :—" That no priest
or deacon shall be liable to any suit, penalty, or cen-
sure for refusing to solemnise the marriage of any
person whose adultery or crime has been the CattEo
of the dissolution of the marriage."

After some further discussion-, in order to meet an
objection of Sir W. HEATHCOTE,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL substituted the follow-
ing form of the proviso, partly adopted from Mr.
Walpole's proposed amendment :—" That no
clergyman in holy orders of the United Church of
England and Ireland shall be compelled to solemnise
the marriage of any person whose former marriage
may have been dissolved on the ground of his or
her adultery, or shall be liable to any suit, penalty,
or censure for solemnising, or refusing to solemnise,
such marriage."
In this state of the question the sitting terminated.
Certain bills were forwarded a stage.
In the evening, in reply to Mr. Stafford,
Sir J. RAMMER stated the arrangements made
for the clothing of the troops embarked, or to em-
bark, for India.

COMPENSATION FOR LOSSES IN INDIA.
Mr. DISRAELI inquired whether it was intended
to compensate the British subjects for their losses
in India.

Mr. V. S➢IITH replied that a scheme of com-
pensation was under the consideration of the Court
of Directors, which had not yet been submitted
to him.

COMMERCE WITH TURKEY.
Mr. HADFIELD asked a series of questions relative
to our commercial relations with Turkey.

Lord PALMERSTON said that several questions
were yet under consideration; meanwhile, England
was in relation to Turkey commercially under the
Treaty of 1838, and that those relations were in a
satisfactory state.
The Customs' Duties Bill was read a third time
and passed.

The report of the oommittee on the Stamp Duties,
Divorce and Matrimonial Causes, was brought up
and agreed to.

DIVORCE BILL.
The house then returned into committee upon the
Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Bill, resuming the
consideration of the proposed amendments of the
53rd clause, the question being whether Major War-
burton's proviso or the Attorney-General's should be
adopted.
Upon a division, Major Waiburton's proviso was
negatived by 77 to 58.
Mr. CRAUFtTRD and Mr. WIORAM both moved
amendments to the Attorney-General's proviso, but
both were negatived, and the clause as amended was
then agreed to.
Mr. Burr moved to omit the 54th clause, which
abolished the action f,r criminal conversation, re-
marking that, cs the bill then stood, there was no
substitute for this action, the power of imposing a