The Express.
London, England, 1857-08-20 00:00:00

Tyse Farm VICTIMS Moms rt..a..11001)1W.
111WW.,00 . 1111.• Sem 1(Iss sod The
It 1. Mow. T. P. (MM : Yfe M. Oliver.-
-sal ♦ MAU/anti TO MAMlT.V.rors—Casmsiaissl T.

non
TIN 1•1111,111, LIVINik T9O LIT. -Aad ran TIMP/Iff.
0. Kim -Deere •••• hipamite.

mTir• gramma, V.I.L.T.L. A
motkoir*g. Mariptadif=l::.
Mu m% 0•216 "al ;Wr Vlllism—comenoes IA T.

MON WAIT= AT LONDON DRIDOI.
70 Dav—lleraim IL /Parser. ft Um.
twensow—ilmileg, Mi. 1a..-- ativnicas. Y. Sea.

LONDON, THURSDAY, AUGUST 20.

Tar concretion made by °averment to the per-
sonal scruples of the clergy, in mottling dot no
objecting clergyman should be compennitomildnain
a remarriage between parties whose adultery
been the ground of divorce, went, to say the leant of
it, quite far enough. The limitation on this ems&
aion, introduced and carried by a very coweiiffieffib
majority yesterday morning, pots the whole trtllts
on an exceedingly fair footing. By 78 to 33 Wolfing',
affirmed the proposition, that when a dergyaftit
any parish refuses himself to solemnise a megdarto
under the Divorce Bill, it shall not be °impotent
for him to reftwe the use of hie church or
chapel for the

of such marriage by any
other clergyman licensed to officiate in the diocese.
Nothing can be more just than this. The concession
of Teaday night was a concession to a conscientious
scruple ; it was a concession made in order to avoid
the harshness of compelling a man actively to take
part in that to which, on religious grounds, he ob-
jects. Differing, sa we do, tote emlo, with those
by whom the objection is entertained, we entirely
concur with the amendment which war introduced

to give it effect ; and this on the plain ground that
no Government has a right, without paramount ne- ;
amity, to enjoin on any portion of its subjects, by
law. the performance of ass art which AM=
them in the alternative of violating their
consciences if they obey the law, or exposing
themselves to penalties if they disobey it. But
there is obviously a very wide distinction between
this relief to the individual clergyman, and a law
which should close the doors of the Charlie what
those who wish to avail themselves of its sorvicem
The Church is instituted, not for the benefit et the
clergy alone, bat for the whole assembly of Christi=
people who belong to its communion. To confer on
any given clergyman the right of refusing the mi-
nistrations of the Church to any else by law entitled
to their benefit, simply bemuse he himself happens
le entertain a conscientious sample against ce-
Meeting them, would be grossly to miscon-
ceive the relation of the clergy to the
Church, and of the Church to the People.
The Church and the services of the Church
are not the exclusive patrimony of the priests
who minister at the altar, but the common inherit-
WOO of that great Christian community for whose
spiritual welfare and edification the Church was in-
stituted and her Berrien appointed. To the peti-
tioning clergy the language of the Government is
this—Religious scruples, you say, preclude yoa from
celebrating these marriages which, by a solemn Act
of the Legislature, we are declaring to be legal.
Very well; we will respect your scruples; we will
not compel you to do what you aware as would be
in violation of your coneeiencee ; bat you are not the
Church—you are only a portion of the officiating
servants of the Church, and we are not going to
commit the injustice of allowing year mere personal
scruples to preclude those whose marriage+
this law sanctions, from having those marriages
solemnised, if they so please, according to the rites
of the Church, and in whatever ecclesiastical edifies
they can procure a clergyman to celebrate them ia.
We give you the right of refusing to perform the
ceremony yourselves; we will sot cesseede to roadie
further right of prohibiting its performance by tithe e,
aye, even though the place of its celebratioa should
chance to be in the building which by a popular
inaccuracy of language you all you► Church, but
which in fact, and in law, is not so much yours as
it is that of your parishioners.

In other respects the Bill, in medal; through its
penultimate stage yesterday, received mom importaat
inodilicatioas. The local courts seopowand to mesroime
juriedintion in matrimonial camas ware arigualed is
coo clues.; • modified power of memoring damps
in respect of the Wadies of the with was accorded
by another. The local authorities Axed on by the
Arroaxxr-Osintutt for the trial of Dimes
camas am the Judges of Assize, or semi*
Moneys eased by them. Chairmen of QUM.
Eleniaes in counties, and Recorders in hommlba
Adadtting that this selection, m far as it rale IP
sebjectionsble, we must still express amir squat
that the suggestion of Mr. Derr ben Me loos
adopted, by adding the County Courts to the list.
The great advantage of these latter comb is, the frt_
query with which they are held, and their extreme
sessmibility to all dames in all districts.
It was objected to their jarisdietioa, by Mr.
ELM= and other honourable chairmen of Quar-
ter Somiona. that causes amain before these
trammels moo despatched with a rapidity and a
carelessness not at all adapted for investigations of
ma gravity as those which mast statutorily arise
in suits for divorce. This objection we believe to be
kneaded in enor. The great majority of the cams
cumin before the Comity Comte ars men money
claim, a ameiderable proportion of which are an.
To loiter over business if this deeeriptioa
-`-'tvie but a sheer waste of public time ;

diked. To U
would be noW: