The Express.
London, England, 1858-03-24 00:00:00

MARRIAGE WITH ♦ DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER.

Mr.II767;sos,I6.ZZILIER, and Lard ilti7r 7oressnl:l
=none in favour of the motion of the last-named noble
Lord BURT felt that an apology was due from him for
his attempting to handle a subject like this, which had
already niceived the attention of members of much hirhr
consideration he; bat he believed that his best ape
would be the house that he had not ventured to
to *bout giving to the consideration of the
question all the abilities of which he was master. The law
ea it at present stood was, upon this subject, most unmade-
factmy. The recent case of " Brock v. Brook" proved
how da.lt, how unntosmarily colepitoaesd It was. Upon
any subject of importance, this wee a state of things much
to lie depkred ; but it was above all things to be complained
of in this case; for on the part of tits legislature no doubt
existed which need leave the matter where it was.
Many divisions bad taken pleas in that house on this subject,
and in each of them the principle for which he contended
had been affirmed. And it was • remarkable fact that his-
tory showed them no thilieed natkos in which this question
stood as it did in ingiand. In the old Roman law them
marriages were permitted, and even in the early history of
our own Retormadon we should seek in vain for the confusion
of the present day oa this subject. With regard to the ea-
-I=part of the question, it might be tasted by • simple
Either these marriages woes prohibited by Saip-
tare or they were not. If they were, those who said
so should point out the pump which prohibited them.
Now there was in truth but one purge which woolly
attached upon this question. That occurred in the lath
chapter of Leviticus. The 18th vane of that chapter,
it was true, prohibited the marriage of a wife's sister, but
thin that was in the case where the wife wee yet alive.
(Hear, hear.) Reference was sometimes made to the 16th
verse, which prohibited the marriage with a brother's widow,
sad it was said that, arguing from analogy, these marriages
must be prohibited. But it appeared to him that the 16th
verse really told the other way; for it was certainly
to be supposed that had such en inference been true the
Almighty would not have left It merely an inference
but would have directly declared the law. A reference too
which was sometimes made to the 25th chapter of Deutero-
nomy appealed equally open to the same objection. With
regard to the canon law that was based entirely on the
scriptures, and if the argument failed upon them it most fail
aecesearily in regard to that which was based upon them. The
canon law upon this subject was to be found in the decrees
of two councils which were not oecumenical, and therefore
of no genteel authority ; in the Reformed° Lego, which
was never sanctioned by parliament or other sufficient
authority, sad in the Table of Archbishop Parker,
which was drawn up for Queen Elisabeth.
Re nett came to the statute law. Since the time of Henry
VIII., eight statutes bad passed, the Ant of which was
26 Homy VIII., c. 22, repealing previous statutes, but all
the laws of that monarch arose out of his capricious desires
and anxiety to get tia of his successive wives. At List hay-
ing exhausted various statutory derioes this monarch re-
turned to the Levitical prohibition, and the law was axed as
it stood at the present moment. There was in feet no abso-
lute statutory prohibition of these marriages, bat judges had
Interpreted the laws in different ways, and the effect of this
bill, if it became law, would be merely declaratory, declaring
that whatever might have been the decision of courts of law,
with • declassed wife's sister was neither void nor
but was just and honourable in every respect.
Prom the statutes which he had cited he deduced this
ens malt, that however parliament might have sought to
inset the views of the reigning monarch, it had never wholly
ceased to do homage to the Bible, even when it set its in-
struction at naught. There were some gentlemen who ob-
jected to these marriages solely on the grounds of social
Welpediency. To them and to all other opponents he would
say, that all he T
asked was for leave to introduce the bill, re-
serving all argument for future stages. Hs should the
only urge against the expediency argument the broad principle
of liberty, namely, that a man bad • right to do whet
was proper in his own eyes, provided that in so
doing he did not interfere with the rights of his fellow sub-
jects. (Rear, hear.) Should the Scripture prohibition be
proved to exist, he (Lord Bury) would give up all advocacy,
but if not, he should
iaes slthat the present state of the law
abridged the rights of nehmen, and he hoped in future
stages of the bill ly to defend that posit's,. The
noble lord conaluded by moving kr ism to bring in the bal.
Mr. DIVETT eseapknested the molds lord as the tone
and temper in which, Its bed argued the qualiss, het still
meat say that his (Kr. Divests) cesviotions were as strong
se ever against the coneemelea songht. An kr
reeneity of trouble bed been taken with this question
by • body called the Marriage Law Rehm AleXalliCe. of
which, be presumed, the noble lord was to he considered the
organ. Immediately after the law of 1836, • miry rick
appswhose name was no secret. wonted to ImM Ms
ister, and employed en eminent solicitces' Inn to get
withassociation.- The country was at owes Misdated
=llPhiett, and every men who bad no idles of his own
was at owes to aenced to odort the ides of this smooktkee.
Re (Mr. Mott) we Inundated with these paisphkk, sad
haring weft boar to do at the time, he /sad then all, sad
the ismk was • eancistisa that ad &kepis et • drags of
the kw desedd be stmaresnely remised. (Misr, boar.)
15 of the seateresats in them pencillere
that with • deemed skim wee hod abraeA,
=.a..rmdistanses woman had bass wheedled ores. to the
mid had *me costracesd mackerel whirl were of
no- tome tbses than that of the Awry over • breesestirk.
(Oh, d.) It was hies, sad subss=ll= ofb=
mem bed lame eel end end
(Hem,
riaberc.) In ens ere lately •Bthe property bed bean
to the ream Ho, far owl &odd NI
no Weeks tic imbrinstlem of ths
Mr. DIALINS inghiaal that 7attie Cromwell' Ali-