The Express.
London, England, 1850-02-28 00:00:00

LAW OF MARRIAGE BILL.

Hr. J.S. having prevented vest number
of pe Wone in favour of the metre, proc tiled to move
the second readies of the hill. As the provides' of the bill
were well Mown to the bowie, he need not page over the
extensive ground which had bees gone ov.r in previous dis-
cussions. Ile regretted he was opposed on this quoit to many
boa gentlemen who sat ow the same side with him, gad for
whose opinioce be entnteined the highest respect; bat
having dia'y considered the tune he was about to take
before he tiered upon it. and beteg fortified by the opinions
of many hafted and pies men of high station and cha-
racter is the e:iurch ant out of it, he felt that he was cot at
liberty to onsult his own private feeler, which would have
tilted kin probably in recede from the task. The present
bill I. Its main toile:ors was the seas in prirciple as the
tae of last ye-r. It planned to grout relief in the in-
state of marriages the prohibition of which was proved
to be productive of the greatest moral evil. (Hear,
hear.) In framing the bill of lest year, he ecdeavoured,
es tar se paisib'e, to avoid siring ground of Irri-
tant' t 3 the feelings of any put of the community or
of an; relloitte body, and this year, profiting by experience,
he had titutround to restrict the bid to that which most
required amendment, and thus its far se p sable to avert
opposition. (Hear, hear.) Is list year's bill he propcsed
to legalise marriage not only with the deceased wife's
sister, but also the matriage—which was nowhere for.
la !den by seeipture nor by the ties of blood—with the
lien of the emend wife. But, yielding to the feelings
rather thee the judgment, perhaps, of some of his own sup-
porters. as well as of some of the opponents of the measure,
ard feeling that the numb,, of Curb marriages was to small
that the practical grievance war much less then in the other
can, he had thought it right to omit that provision from the
present biii. In the bill ef last year he thought he was coo.
suture the enlist of the church and of a large n.ajority of
the cleray, who might be expect.dto oppose say alteration of
the eating law, as alto, on the other hand, the large L.
sort ecepprien g many meet pi All and leareed men sheet&
a different view, seethe the state of opinion in the chuck,
net to make it compulsory, bet to leave the clergy at liberty
to perform such usen-ges d disposed, hut from the discus
Moe on the bill sad the petition presented he found that by
a very large body of the church that provision writhed
ups. as an imitation of diorite's*, sad was offensive alike to
many of those who diffend trees !atm as well as to others
who were favourable to tha principle of the measure. (Hear.)
Yielding then to this view he had is the present inetur.
abandoned that prevt•ioa and had Wetted another the effect
of which would be to preserve the discipline of the church
whole and entire, leaving the clergy of the church who wen
milder the snidest and disciple's, of their superior, liable
to eccleeisetleal censure if they sikmnised such 'marriages
contrary to the ord:rt date euperion. and the discipline of
the church coseequently sedosached. (lieu, hear.) He had
been etrosely anxious also to consult the feelings of the
clergy. of the Church of Smit'and whore position in this re,
specs oilseed materially from that of the clergy of the Eng-
lish church. Strange as it might seem, amongst the canons
salted fur subeeniptioa by tier en of the Church of
England on than 'dation t a holy orders, this canon
relating to 'write with the deceased wife's sister did not

appear. But the case was different is the thank of
Scotland. Clergymen cf that church, on their &daisies,
were required to noble-the to that %Iron. In the Pet
con7ession ff...1.1-r-thl. of .7.-1;4 X lel—lbere was no peon-
lion prohibiting these marriages; but in the subsequent con-
fession—the second confession which was ;mesa by the
Assembly of Westminster in the beat of the rebellion, and he
might say in the heat of fanaticism—this particular canon
was inserted, end the clergy of the church of Scotland were
to this day bound to suinvibe to it. Such were the motives
which had induced him to make the alteration in this respect
is the present bill from that of last year. The measure was
simply and altogether one of relief. It attacked no men's
conscience—it everetd is no way the religious feelings of
any community, neither did it interfere with the discipline
of any church ; but on a question of admitted difficulty and
immemorial controversy, at simply allowed to each commu-
nity, and to evert; individual churchman or dissenter, free-
doss of judgment. And in doing this he had confined the
question to the narrowest possible ground. The leading
feature of the measure was to legalise the marriage with
the deceased wife's sister. That was the existing gnevance
which it was his object to introduce a practical remedy for.
Judgirg from the nature of the objections, he very much
doubted if the bill were really undoes/ od even in that
loam. It had been argued frequently, as though it were
a question as to the character of these marriage'. That was
sot at all the question. If this bill were pared, each com-
munity, each family, and each individual, might form their
own opinion as to the character of such marriages, as freely
as they could now. There was nothing Is the bill defining
the character of these marriages ; the object was merely to
say that there was notion., in scripture, nothing in the prin-
ciples of morality, to induce the legislature to declare such
marriages invalid Neither was he about to call upon the
home to alter some anci.nt and long-established law. The
statute he troposed to amend way only 15 years old. The
law as it now stood was never the law of England till the
year 1835; and this exoettion, if he might use the word,
was given to the law of the church, that if the fact of the
marriage was proved in the Ecclesiastical Court,
the law of the land allowed it to exist during
life, sad sinless prcceediegs were taken beforehand,
It was incontestable after death as well as during
life. He believed there was no instance of any such mar-
risme being annulled in former times, unites for the purpose
of obtaining property. NHS opinion was not opposed to
ouch marriage', for they were by no means unfrequent in the
lower and middle class of life, and the first case in the upper
class brought promirmatly forward was sanctioned by the
legislature in the bill of 1833, which prohibited similar MU-
riff( for the future. Ta, y were all aware of the circum-
stance. under which the bill was passed—(bear, hear)—and
he therefore would , not repeat them. Mr. Wortley
then, at some length, considered the social evils expected
from the 111111 h» by its opponents—which be believed would
be so greater them in other comatties—mostrastisel them with
the evils attending the present state of the law—which
proved that pointsr opinion did not sanction it;—and he
adduced fresh evidence, and the testimony of emi-
nest clergymen of large expiiriesee, in favour of
am alttrattoa of the law. The admitted inefficiency
of the law was a great reason why it should be amended.
Public opinion generally diaregands I it; end, notwithstand-
ing the number of such marriages which were constantly
taking plats, they did not shock that johlic opinion. On
the contrary, the married parties were well treated, and no
reproach was cast upon them for having contracted matri•
wormy under such circumstances. He bad been mach, sad
perhaps justly, ridicele'l for having estimated the mar.
nieces so contracted since 1835 at somewhere about
30,000. He thought it possible he was in excess, but
this his catculatios ,:tended to the whole king-
dim ai.al to the colonies, whereas the estimate of ti ose
who differed from Lim was confined to England
and Wain. He b lived, however, that he would have bees
mar the mask had he said that the number of eueh mar-
riages, and eassatitaapte without marriage, since 1835, was
eh aut .41,U00. but he easel at what the exact number
might be. It was admitted that 3,000 or 4,000 such mo-
rtar's had harm s,lernnited; and therefore, averaging the
number of children from each of these marriage" at three,
no fewer then 8,000 men and yawn and 12,000 children,
in an 20,000 perm s, were °enormity injured by the ezistiag
law. (Hear, hear. j The Loodon Church Union bed been
whin/ inquiries on this a abject, and they hail obtalsed 271
answers from parochial clumpy. From thee' answer it sp-
line's! that 211 marrisg. within the prohibited eh gran
bad taken plat, and flat of these 169 were contracted with
a wilt's sister, 11 with a brother's wife' 19 with a nice. and
6 with an aunt. But returns of this description were seldam
to fi- relied upon, inasmuch as Lao contractiag partite son.
misled their discrete of sanity from the deny at the time
ta,a, marriages were solemnised. (Hear, hear.) The hes. and
ai sr gentleman then read affecting lett, in which bed passed
between (slimness mod some of the most exemplary of their
panel. ,oners who had restricted marriage wi.bin the pro-
hitaittet dewires, In which the former elm-lei their bleep
regret that the print at state of the low compelled them to
look UV."' sash aterrians as illegal, and concluded amid
los4 cheesy., by movie, that the bill he read • second tams.
Th.: motion laying bees duly ascended,
Sir F. THESIOEH oppneed the wand reading. It was sew
len years ago *ism a number of persons of wealth, sons
of IleMea bail 'iodated Ike law by contracting /YET imps
whack it prohibited ; coth n who were scrupulous es the sob-
;./..•, het who desired so of terettios of the law, senciated them-
e. Iwo together Arol employed ottorof ye of very great teepee's
wilt) to take ouch metsuros as is their professional discretion
they should think espailient for the purpne of obtaining the
object of the parties. Undoubtedly, the porteVerante, the

skill. the adding., the sustained prosemation of the object
committed to the charge of three attorneys fully jusil•
fled the choice made et such They eon-
menced as truly as the year 1840, by feeling public,
opinion on the 'abject by the publication of pamphlets,
written with very greet ability, is will* the question as
to these marrirestatag prohibited by nil* u well se
bosun law was . Thus were fingered up by at
cuter, sent to all the bishops and arebobielpehisrelidt theses
opinion—certsinly with no very great "Mu
they preluded to solicit petitions and 'kers a;
clergymen ; and he had reams &abetters that luny leVie.
linen read to-dav, were letters ink had be oliotalsed
darns' the pried when the attorneys wen agitating tint
question on behalf of those who suployed them. They thee
proceeded to lay cases before the different tenderest the bar,
and got their opinion. They even took advantage of the Mains]
law, the law of settlement, in order to keep alive in the
public mind this question ; and ultimately. they employed
professionally no leas than nine different individuals, who
were sent into various districts hie the purpose of collecting
materials to enable the units to obtain the object they bad
had so long in view. Now, he did not slop to inquire whir
they the selection of these gentlemen urse by reason of their
known opinions on the subject. He did not attribute Vest
they were not gentlemen of character and intelligence, but
he apprehended that the very astute of their employment
prevented the possibility of their taking en impartial view
of the question. (" Hear hear," and cheer,) They air
etmarily would by introducedC is the first pleas to these inte-
rested in the alteration of the law. What was the result ?
Why, the whole of the evidence they collected for this par.
titular purpoes—the direct object of their mission and em-
ployment—was that which termed the emple of the report
presented to the house. They, in fact, reflected nothing
more than those materials which they had collected
under the circumstances stated. Evidence-had boon given by
41 witnesses. Tea of these whatnots were the professional
*nee employed—(hmar, hear)—and 15 of the others were in-
terraced either personally or through their relations or
friend& There were 2 lawyers examined, and 14 clergymen
aid thinisters of different denominations, all of when ex-
pressed very different opinions on the subject. (Neu )
Now, he had been anxious to ascertain what was the view
the commissioners themselves lock of the state of public

feeling on the question, and he found that they state; that
the majority the clergy of the esub:ished church in this
country objected to such marriages—(ita, hear)—that in
Ireland the great majority of the elerey of the established
church disapproved of them—(heer)—that they were disap-
peeved of in that country by most of i he presbyterian clergy—
that in Scotland the clergy were against them and that among
the laity of the United kingdom the prevalent feeling was
against them. (" Hear, bear," and cheers) We bad,
therefor,, the admission that this was not a ease in which
the state of public opinion imperatively required the house
to penevere. (Hear, hear.) Well, now, what were the
reasons which Induced these learned parsons to form the
opinion they had arrivid at? Why, the reasons were scat.
tared up and down the report, and this was the result: " Be-
nue families of a religious and moral character had, in
many instances where such c nonezions had taken place
smug themselves and their friends, been perfectly satisfied
on a consideration of the whole subject that such carriages
were not objectionable, either in a religious or en sal
point of view ; because experience of the world bad
proved that these marriages sprung out of •
particular combins.ion of circumstances which gave ries to
feelings naturally leading to marriage; sled because it was
not • state of the law, prohibitory or permissive, which had
governed, or would effectually govern, such attschmi nu and
marriages." Now, anybody looking at this report, with an
inclination to criticise, might be induce,. to thick that, from
the unguarded expressions used, it seemed to be the opinion
of the commissioners that, whatever might be the state of the
law on any subject, if the gratification of the desires of corn
should lead them to violate the law, they should be allowed
to do so. (Hear, hear) And taking thew reasons, as the
reasons of the commissioners, they almost went to justify any
breach of morality, provided the concurrence of cir-
cumstances rendered it natural. (Hear, hear, and
cheers.) Well, now, under these circumstances, with this
present view of the state of public feeling on the subject—
with thus reasons which, after deliberation, these learned
panes ham put lace the face of this report, the house was
called tapes by his right hon. friend to legislate upon this
important matter, and in one particular respect to alter our
law of marriage, and to allow • person to marry the sister of
kis deceased wife. At the outset, • very serious and startling
question presented itself—namely, were or were net these
murrain the subject of divine prohibition ? (Hear, hear.)
It was admitted that if they were so, it would be presump-
tuous in the house to legislate in en opposite character.
Ha.h man must determine for himself before he
entered on • c scsideration of this question, whe-
ther he was or was not of opinion that there
was a divine prohibition attaching to marriages of the kind.
(Hear, hear.) He should have most earnestly d. sired that
the opinion of the church could in some way have been col-
lected—in some sweatily of divines, either in convocation or
otherwise—ins ceder that this preliminary question of vital
importance might be settled. He knew that that weuld be
considered by many as • weak abandonment of the tight of
private judgment, and be confessed he bad no great expecta-
tion that ar y sue.' proposition would meet with favor from
the house. He must, then, form his own deliberate, conga.
anions opinion for himself, and he must endeavour WI weU
as he could, amidst all the edmitted difficulties of the
subject, to same to that conclusion which he thought
was warranted by • correct judgment of the wetter. (Hear,
hear.) Now, he felt the painfulness of discussing a question
of this description before an assembly of teat kind. He did
not mean to enter into any minute or parties/sr details on
the subject. The paramount question was whether there
wee a divine prohibition of these mere isrs, and ie the
absence of any Zeciaraucn tai the church, in convocation or
otherwise, individuals must form their own deliberate
opinion, and he believed that the prohibitions in the Leviti.
cal law on the subject of marriage were not part of the
political, bat of the moral law of the Jews, and that they
were of universal obligation. Ilia conclusion was, that thesis
starrier.' were forbidden by that law ; but if there was
even a doubt, it was not a matter of mere worldly prudence,
but of the highest wisdom, not to concur in an act which
far anything certainly known might be opposed to the
Divine will. The first affect of this measure would be to
legalise marriages contracted in kaolin and wilful violation
of the law, and he endeavoured to counteract the
sympathy which Mr. Wordier had tried to swam in fav or
of the poor law, by showing that their interest in this quer
tloa was an after.thought ; that the pievalame of three
marriages amongst the poor had been greatly overstated ; in
short, that the cue of the poor had entirely failed, and with
it the argument founded upon urgency. Upon the s icial
part of the question, and the expediency of changing the law,
he enumerated the mischiefs of legalising such unions, which, '
be contended, greatly outweighel the conveniences; for the
lake of a few, the legislature would am the seeds of alienation
and suspicion in many families. This bill, too, whilst it
broke down the barriers between parties in the nearest re-
lations of affinity, still left those in the remoter relations
subject to the present law. It inhibited this further in-
consistency—that it left the doctrines and canons of the church
untouched, which, if not based upon the divine law, could be
controlled by parliament, and thus (sinned • door to in-
justice towards the poor. It was quite clear that
number of clergymen who would refuse to solemnise mar
risges of this description. It was said that ha those cases the
parties might go to another perish to be married. But the
pow man could not leave his home ; be was tied to hie
habit ition and his occupation ; be could not afford the real.
dent* which was neenwary to enable him to contract mar-
riage in another parish. But suppose he did, and he returned,
he would be regarded by his minister as having violated
the divine law; and what would be the consequence
Either he would be driven to the ranks of the dissenters,
or he would be compelled to remain without the counts.
sance or approbation of the clergyman. Then it was said that
he might go to the registrar, and get married in that
way. But if he did, he did not better his position.
He bad now stated, impsrfutle he knew, the grounds on
which he deeply felt the necessity of resisting to the utmost
the introduction of a law of this description. They might
appear to many, perhaps, grounds not founded on reason,
bet they wen those which he conscientiously entertained,
and therefore he felt it his duty to move, and he now
moved, " that this bill be read a mond time this day six
mouths."

Col. THOMPSON shorly supported the bill ; as did

Mr. IIEADLAM, ,ho cot tended that, if these marriages

were not prohibited by Scripture, it was a matter of duty to
thou who suffered a grievous to afford them relief ; and
whilst Scripture did not in terms prohibit such unions, ana-
logy wu in fauwr of the non-' xistecce of a Divine prohibi-
tion. The present law waa intffictual, and without el•ar
neosesity and the explicit sanction of the Divine law, it was
highly im,olitic to array a portion of the people in direct
opposition to the law.

Mr. WOOD acknowledged that this bill removed a por-
tion of his objectifies to the measure, but it left some remain-
ing. He took • very wed. view of the aserriege lace of
ancient nations, and deduced the couched...a that as nations
advanced in civilisation, they always became peculiarly on
their guard against a relaxation of morals. This considera-
tion, therefore, independently of its religions aspens, made
the question • very pave one as respected the are and
moral conditi..n of our homes. The morale of this cauntry,
he maintained, were superior to thsee of the continent,
which he attributed in • great measure to the confidence
reposed in our young unmarried women and the icnocent
liberty conceded to them, and to the devotedness and at-
tachment of oar married worn, ',the one being • consequence
of the other; and it was a seri des question whether, in this
state of things, the removal os the existing barriers
would not directly tend to • relax etion of our morale.
Upon the subject of the po,r, ha impeached, the accuracy of
the stetisticel evidence appealed co by Mr. Wortley,
observing that a diligent inquiry into those of Weatmine er
had discovered only one cue of a man married to his wile's
sister, and he was leaked down upon by lie neighbours;
whild there ww• two woos of men living with th. it own
aftaers. The WOUVIS of England were deeply interested in
this question, tad their sentiment., so far as they had been
',suared. were hostile to the measure Upon the religious
past of the question, he rPanitliated the interpretation put
upon the &raptures It)) T-Imudists, preferring the sounder
•ziotwition esontedui d en the Sermon on the Mount, which
'aught us that we should nut slur ier but extend the moral
law. Tease was na known e :ample of such a marriage iu
toe Christian church tallier tt,an the fifteenth century, end
finales, Baum" and o h r :eu,horitits, had laid it down as
• rule that questions o tlinfty sal consanguinity were
gemmed by the sago prim, pie.

Ms. A. HOPM wad the ad atoneteot of the deb .te.

Mr. 8. WORTLEY said that as the Speaker bed <l;ties
to portent elsewhere, and as three was no prospect of the
debate li,dog teasel uded dirt Porting, he should be glad to
rehabs him Item his duties in that boon. Ile would, there-
fore, more the adjournm. tat at the debate sill Weduaday
neat. The ►on. and learn. d member for Oxford's bill (the
♦frmation Bill) was heed lot that day, but he believed the