The Express.
London, England, 1855-05-10 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS,

.
• kiln Ns •••• • 1=11440 the wade.
esSsee Wages WU* g the quad's
le siellee id hang wave pee& af ads
be thought that eidieseeeS lied beat si.
Zr•Zgueeve that a helm Wire he as shanties
of au seising law, Mid bees esid„ la the owe
et die debate ea de reseal bill. that agleam Wish
was kept up as di epodes we the ghettos eta ker
wady mum We were suffering for heir Wheelies et
es iss; igesitieg, however, but sere 'Thal etatasessis
Wilkie wee se hid bees eared to the hou ; se jams seas.
ewe bed bees Weight /inward ia peed. haw aba Am.
valises whisk be bad bees die is make tiles altitt=
be wee id Is Whys that the paver dame wan
W a greeter cutest in this suedes than thes hi** Mika
Nadu ef sesisty. However that might be, he was slue of
this, that the peueest law premed tylankally uon all
elassie. and belhemilire felt it his duty to sipport lb. bill.
pp. D. PAlMendentood the chug was advocated
4111 ON iposamsi that the prohibitioe lad no relishes
asassas ; wall y, that if it had, it was asst
seder the Limiting kw, and was not bindiestheraore eggs
Christians. His his and learned friend hd said that Ike
were prebend te peeve that Lord Lyndhest's Act oli
we Ile used' ins with the opponents of thebilL But they
I were eel &Win with Lord Lyndhurst's let. But they
' wan asked by tisk' bill to repeal a law whin had bus the
law of the land from the beginning of history and a law fowl
sessised by all Christendom. It was • mistake* sajithat the
=was not intended by our nisch. drobbisho
lii the convention of l6il, the lathers of the
.tea
Articles, put forward this case specially, ant
pelieVs the front of the canon, showing the it was by a
leilh at, but by_ deliberate decision, that the probibitim
was imposed. He would reed the canon, translated into
Baia& It tea kir" All marriages, whet anywhere
bele bles eselseeted within the degree o conangainity or
snaky posialliftai by the 18th chapter of Letticas, stall
bedissolved by the asknity of the bishop, (genially the
swinge of any one who, after the death of his termer site,
lies married her sister • for this degree. accori Jag b the
tinat of all learned men, is held to be prohibbid."
es. and learned member quoted the cisanataries
of Bishop Gibson, Bishop Jewell, and other authorities in
support of this calm, and urged that as by the klesisstical
law the man and his wife were one flesh, thecae, of a
deceased wife was the sister of the husband, and therefore
shady we within the prohibited degrees. Me whole
mem of eglariellg, fees Christianity downwards had pro-
mial nen. amegebeicle, that of prohibiting lase mar-
shy'. ise Ationauwei was reponeditoz:: thought
ft a adezeport) te have add, .. that la the catboat,
dwelt than swebsee were considered as marriges which
sold sot be 'stud iato without the sanction of tieback,
bet were never ansidered void what contracted, and that
did dwelt weer seek twos itself to grant disensations
he wedeln Useideed hipedeous and contraryn theism
et OMLN 11 Oil Illiest the Roman Whin church
did We he marriages entitle the pro.
Wed =rites, nothing add be more erroneous. We had
WENS ever sad over aegis is history of tic Roman
Whille daub grandee dispensatiess for marrines within
the geohibited degrees. With regard to the argument
ling Abe prohibitions laid down in -Levitials, Omagh ad-
tinsel le the Jews, ware of universal applicatan—thoss
marriages within the prohibited degrees of conengniaity
were arao the sins of the Canunites whiohweretsscriDbeedd
as and for which they were cast out of the land.
These We for change in this matter, and eh rejected
the whim of ages, and all authority, deniandedwhen the
law was pat before them, " Show us a reason fur par law."
He objected to such a demand as • basis fur bgislatioa.
Apply it generally and the repeal of every prohbttory law
night be called for on the same ground. It wassaid there
was no direct scriptural authority in favour of Its prohibi-
tion, and that scriptural practice was often foutd to slow
lion marriages within the prohibited degrees. I wee time
that at the beginning of the human race, brother and War
married, and it was neither unnatural noe west I
bat as society progressed, such changes wee latsr
dined under tie Divine wiping us motility sad
social order rendered necessary. Polygyny was
not prohibited by direct scriptural muttony, bat
as the world advanced—u civilisation progresed, and
a higher standard of morality was established—it was tonal
nacenary to prohibit it. But pass this bill, and tow could
they maintain that prohibition, if the demand fonts repeal
use beaked by agitation ? He should like to hair how his
hes. std learned friend would oppose such a plopositioe;
foe the argemente he had advanced in favour d this bill
would weigh with ten thousand times more force on behalf
of amassing for legalising polygamy. (Hear, hes) During
the whole period of the Old Testament it was motioned ;
' sad he should like to know from his hon. Wend Ike member
for North Warwickshire, in what part of the New Testa-
client it was prohibited ? And upon the matter of sathority,
many able writers had advocated polygamy, and :he Moe.
monites—as it appeared from a letter from Salt Like, pub-
tithed last December in the Tines—practised ii, on the
ground that it was strictly scriptural. (A laugh.) It was
said the question of liberty was involved in this prohibition.
He (Mr .R. Palmer) denied that it violated the liberty
of any class. The disseaten, he might be told took a
different view from the church ; but dissenters wen not in
the habit of marrying their wives' sisters. (lieu, hear.)
The fact was that the law fell here and there upon indivi-
duels, and Weans' ume few thousands probably oat of the
wink community had violated it, they were asked to repeal
is, If such ea squaw were foe a:moatent to be tolerated,
it would be impossible to maintain any prohibitory law
whatever. (Hear, hear.) Then, it was urged that the
I proposed change would not inflict injury upon any me.
Bat it would, in this way : those who did not want to Ilan
their wives' enters desired still to regarerthen as their own
I sisters, and to receive them in that character, and for story
use who wished to marry his wile's sister there were tine.
mob who desired to maintain the relationship betwisa
lbw of brother and sister. On that ground, if there were
en other, he would ask the house to reject this till.
(faar, hear.) But further, what could be said of a mea-
NM which said the same thing shall be lawful in England
M inset in Scotland ? That was an inconsiateney witch
me began, was strong enough to express the detestation
with which it must be viewed by all right-minded puns.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. LOWE thought it not more inconsistent to ray, as
bed been done, that a prohibited marriage, which had talon
plea before • certain date, should be lawful, and after a
wide date taunt, than it was to make a class of marrisue
lentil is England which were incestuous by the law of
hietiad. (Her) He did not attach much importance to
what had ben said as to where the burden of proof raid.
The question was, should they continue to prohibit a can
1 from marrying his wife's sister or not 1 He could not help
thiakkg that the contreveny was more in words than in
anything else, and that she burden of proof rested w.th
those who would maintain the prohibition. To • certrin
extent his hon. and learned friend agreed with biro in Ms,
for though he denied that the onus proton& was
with those who sought to alter the law, he proceeded
II pub authorities for the purpose of provtrg
hie an la favour of the law. Tice question was whether
WV gem= sr body of persons having a conviction whbb
an net sheared in by the community generally was entitled
Ie Met that conviction into a law, and compel all other
peons to be guided and ruled by it. Nothing short A
a great principle of morality, which no man could deaf,
meld justify such an interference with individual right,
Mad upon any less ground to compel others to conform to It.
esavictions of one, or of • few, was persecution alien to tie
"int of the tires and of modern lepelatioa. (Hear, beta)
The awAirra wee sot whether the prohibition was antler
ilea ibe Se* of Leviticus, or winkr it was cio-eatea-
she del Obilialka religion, but whether there wen
lane dress of the peed* who differed from it, and whether
Welled a right to upon thine people a rale of lie
whist they did set admit? (Hear. hear.) The argument
apheithe bill peasseisd as Omagh its enactments were cos-
Iti was aid the weave of England objected to Me
bill. , hear.) Wall, the women of England had the
I remedy is heir owe beads ; they were not forced to merry
their WNW bubssii. (Hess, hear, and a laugh.) But
Wow um el the wean of England objected to it, that
essualeamm why Ober women &mild be fettered. The
lea, lewd he member for Chdid Usiversity had
het the guides Mee all redder's a hatter of doubt ; bat
wine they to wields a weidlftry law upon mere doebt ?
If lie les. ad lewd ideal lid dews that such =anima
INNS mangy to ralsille aid sessekseei, be might have
soda eat sew ease then i bee he meaty rice dud
that sub Skimp sot te he left hi be bayed by a
ir
ana's wee el sad wrong. He (Mr. Lowe) did sot
=s is Set for he thought that not only Gou-
lashes@ pinta oat that seeedeses within osrtain
awe 41 emeeepelmity were ad iillestied, for nature
erieledliell by dewing= of rued ill eansequeee of
sea whom. _ eat the while uisebia es Kid we law se
It elidesited was. that shifty- vree die aims Bing as eon-
and that whatever it wall dims that a man
Met marry in a wide degree of awagainity, he
ad W be allured Wale/ whith •Jheiler. *Om id
Ms aukideeil that that Me Ilk IBM dew
Cials,
or themes* ewe. How wee kte bellows
L applied to thee marriages this
new Menlo_l.lCsieeeil ptt weal Wawa's saeinding to his
antlisfagjegniket He urged that thipsebillities dilute
eeell we be vessel es um peneil of dolma
WI asses ben the an. OS RINI* dm"
whist an lab ended for the wow et °Mullein sail
for imilleseen. Did was the peebMt le beidended es
the peeled of upalitasy ? His has.lied learned friend had
Iliedams••• sellesied ea that poke, kat wee the desire that
the if sisteebeed between • man and his wife's sister
dui/ peed. That want, if it anantraething, that ends,
Ile mem law, a woman could a In the bows
lila' idsse's husked in • manner sad under stream-
demos tradateut with sodeety and the opinion of the
WOK Wahle she scald not do if the law was cleaned.
Ible he Mr. Lew) entirely denied, sad he said it was
allaldell in drew le narrow a Hsi between modesty and
lasedeety. It was not possible fee a sea and
enema to rends together in one bow without being *ab-
lest to sad be Mew ad/ a nelaudiel me is
did a addeNash*.h Wee mild fa the hselieste hums sly
dudes the Ms= e/ the die, and wee shade the eshiset of
assulel, end irretrievable rubs gad isahapplases wee
bought ea a peens who had always bees
impuebable. The truth was that these Wags
we sot te be regulated by midge law, bet
by the weal ewe eel tlea pewee el saes toe
remit timpiedia. Eh bssestabls wed naked Woad
sail that pee* Wa/WI We se they did all laws ; but
he dillasese we Mat a ens wow was guilty et W-
hin "Nat hies knewlsh bb enedises that he wee breaking
a p.illee law hesied SI espiiiissey ft sterality ; bat
We a dreMletX wee heed an phew spinal tide
ad WIWI the law of
say sew
that Vow asp WO law of ueeslity, wide
Ilie d rah. law in Ow U not dwwp, to tamp