The Express.
London, England, 1865-01-04 00:00:00

OBN BROODEN.

IA RIGINAL GOLD OILLIN MANUFICTORY,
NJ u ISNRIBTVIAITILUT. ODYKIMOLIDIN.

*OHN BROGDErd GOLD CHAINS.

JOHN BROODEN'S GOLD GUARD CHAINS.

JOHN BROOME/VS GOLD ALBERT CHAINS.

JOHN BROOMS'S GOLD BROOOHOHAINf3.

NIGRITTI sad ZAMBRAII Ow *abaft and
Tao edam MILD °W OW sad TOO aro war-
natal Ea vadvalloi toe roam mad awl Ma la
czolos=.-I.lla2kapralo. LC. ; 111, °walla; LC. ; 112.
W. ; 128.11•444iral sad Copia! Talmo.

PEIMBKR.I we wait Supper for you after
.1.11. the Pantomimes, at EVANS. Pal sot

gite Orprtoo.

TO COBJUISPONDRNTS.
Advartleassata Jambe Syy " The Inymi" Leaden livening
mug b. M tb• am., 10. liminidvberbst. by Ty*
.I..o=ic as she day et pabilestlys.

NAYMARILT.
Tits NnorDro, DAVID GAILRICIL—LaID DIINDRZARY
MAIIILIND AND DONN VOL Mum Sodom Millpondsle.
Buckdoes, Radars : lUssadowdoo.-I.IIINCIBB BRILINOTIMIL
Kr. Coadstou sad MN [soIsy.—SAMIA WEITZ

rerscuss.
Tins imam THY ILAult; HOME IiND TIN ICY 11 LIDEI
rintogss.—...l VIZ MIMS OF LONDON. Maim Vbilay
J. W. lay.ldsnamt toneake, sal
H. Mike ; ilagmedsk ad Omer

Lyanria.
Tim mass. MY vnsirs OCT. Kr. Wlddloomb.
IttrY MM. Noma Wifelike. Ryder. Pltrpatriek. Chides, Bay-
wood, llelntre, Maud.
,I, Clifford : illos C. Ldeleroit.
—Add BlLLfieldCliD ISTOId. Mr. Widdlooralf.

MIETANS lA.
11111 MINIM LITTLE 111754 : co. the Old lady ot
Throodnoodloortroot Madams & lank W. Cesatotd. aud E
Jacob.: Mr. o.Birrood. 1tt064665 Paaloosintoto —And TEM
WOILOIELS or lAMON.-.oamireane at Irlicass 6.

171011 WAIII AT LONDOS-3111DDL
TIM DAY 'Janda& a. Nes.....Afteases.
TOM &OW Manila& 7h. Ibm......Aftleassa. 71h.

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 4.

Timm is a lady of illustrious birth whose cheerful
presence and unvarying goodness have endeared bee
to the country. It is natural to take an interest in
all that can affect the happiness of those for whom
we feel regard, and thus the family relations of this
lady, and the new connexions which it was sup-
posed she was likely to form, have at various times
been spoken of in society, and formed the subject of
veiled allusion in the press. Last week, however,
the Churchman conceived the time had come for
discarding further delicacy, and announced that the
band of this lady had been sought in marriage by
a peer of Great Britain, but that the Royal
Marriage Act stood in the way. The consent of the
QUZLN was necessary to the union, but was with-
held. Her Mazur: remaining inexorable—so the
story ran—en heroic resolution was taken. "In
" the presence of GOD and with the blessing of the
" Church," the marriage was celebrated, and
though henceforth the Princess may be compelled by
Court etiquette to take inferior rank, she will have
" dealt a death-blow to one of the most immoral
" and tyrannical acts which has ever disgraced
" our Statute-book." The story has had a good
run, and since the gossip-mongers must by this time
have exhausted all the excitement it is capable of
affording, we feel no compunction in observing
that no such marriage has taken place. Those
who are better informed sa to what passes in
courtly circles than we pretend to be, state that
the circumstances, whatever they were, which
gave support and countenance to the rumours of •
proposed marriage ceased to exist some months
ago. Our ecclesiastical contemporary will, there-
fore, have to forge new bolts if he wishes to
destroy the Royal Marriage Act. But why should,
that law be stigmatised as immoral and tyrannical
beyond all others 4 Its object is fair and legiti-
mate. It was passed in 1772 in order to preserve
the distinctness of the Royal Family, and prevent
a confusion of interests which might have endan-
gered the stability of the monarchy, and would
certainly have been prejudicial to the State
and the liberties of the people. It is much to be
regretted that any restriction of the kind should
be necessary, and that the highest in the land
should be excepted from the enjoyment of that
individual liberty which the meanest subject is free
to exercise. The limitation exists, however, for
the public good ; and if it is artificial, which seems
to be the great objection, it is not more so than the
lastitution which it guards. It must, therefore,
be accepted as one of the incidents of greatness.
The law, however, is not so harsh as some writers
frequently assume. There is a constitutional
appeal from the exercise of the prerogative of the
Crown. It is provided that if any person subject
to the statute should persist in a resolution to
marry after the consent of the Sovereign has been
refused, he or she may give notice to the Privy
Council, and may at any time within twelve months
after such notice contract marriage, unless both
Houses of Parliament, before the expiration of the
year, should expressly declare their disapproval of
the intended marriage. The law is objectionable,
not so much on account of the kind as of the exces-
sive scope and range of the authority it gives the
Crown. It was passed at a time when the royal
succession in the House of BRUNSWICK might be
deemed precarious, and just as two sons of
Grottos 111. had married subjects of their father
contraryto his wishes. But it was made to applyto all
Princes and Princesses descended from GEORGE 11.,
with the exception of the issue of Princesses mar-
ried abroad. At the present day, owing to the in-
crease of the Royal House, it applies not only to the
children, but to the cousins german of the Q CERN.
The wisdom of this extended application is more
than doubtful. Every restriction on marriage is an
evil, and is only to be justified on the ground of
necessity ; where that is wanting the restriction
is indefensible and injurious. Let it be observed
that the circumstances under which the law now
operates are very different from those which have
existed in any previous generation since its enact-
ment. The QUEEN has nine sons and daughters,
three of whom are married and have families. The
succession to the Crown in the direct line is
therefore as well secured as can be reasonably de-
sired, and the interest of the QUEEN'S cousins in it
is so insignificant that it might safely be disre-
garded. It would appear, therefore, that no public
grounds—and such alone were in the intention of
the Legislature—remain for interfering with the
personal predilections of the latter in questions of
marriage. A reasonable construction and a tempe-
rate administration of the law, so as to retain its
application as much as possible within the circle
of family interests, is what the public has most
reason to desire. The statute was not passed
without long and vehement debates in both
Houses, and we should be exceedingly sorry to
see the subject again brought before Parliament.
As for the outcry against the Act, as if it in-
fringed upon anybody's religious liberty, it is
utterly futile, and may be altogether disregarded.
The clergy are bound to respect this, as all other
laws of the land ; bound not only by
the ordinary obligations common to every
subject, but afro by the duties growing out