The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-06-05 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE BRITISH PRESS.

ilia—The Insertion at the present moment, in your rare-
lent and widely circulated Paper, of the fullootne retro-
spective clause in the above Bill (the second reading of
which stands fur Friday next, in the House of Lords), intro-
duced by way of amendment a few days ■go, while passing
through the House of Commons, may prove a valuable hint
to many holders of landed property, purchased by them or
their ancestors, or which has been conveyed since the pass.
Ing of the Marriage Act, about 68 years ego.
" Aud be it further Enacted, That in all f mar.
risess had sod solemnised before the petering of this Act,
without say such rousent as aforesaid, and where both the
parties shall at the time of passing th.a Act have atlaiued
the age of 21 years, and have continued to live together as
husband and wife, or shall only have dircootiuued their co-
habitation for the purpose or during the pending of soy pro.
ceediwg tootling the validity of sorb marriage, such mar.
rite shall be deemed to be good and valid, to all iuteets sad
purposes what.over."
Although it he the policy of both our Statute and Com-
mon Law to secure the titles of bona fide purchasers of
real propirty, it is obvious that the above clause will in
innumerable eases directly distssib such titles, ■ud shake
those land-marks by which couveyaniers must always 'tr-
amway he guided.
The retrospective operation of this clause not only goes
to destroy vested interests of infants es well as others, but
its injustice is such that even the rights of letioceiti par.
chatters end others fa mats actually wending are sot spelled
by it, the consequences revolting trom which are of the
deepest importance to the families of many iodooduals of
the greatest property in the state.
Among other ineousistencies, it makes those mirages
good which the Courts have pronottheed to be insight' (eve■
where the parties have married again), ■t least in shose
eases where the former cohabitation was resumed Omni,
after the determination of the question.
It is unnecessary, I trust, to point out any more of the
incongruities and glaring absurdities with which this mon-
strous clause is fraught, as I am conlideot none of them
will escape the vigdauce or foil to meet the disapprobation
of the Lew Lords, whose attention will inevitably be drawn
to a retrospective enactment, not only unconstitutional road
a vinlatios of the general rules ofjurtsprudenee, but cslco.
lated to produce infiuite mischief, gross injustice, aril end.
less litagatiou. BEACON.

Last eight an Inquest was held in the Committee Room,
at Guy's Hospital, before 'Moira Shelton, Ea% us the body
of William Baker. The deceased was a ship carpenter, and
on Aluuday morning he wan at work on board a 'creel in the
Thames, when lie fell from else deck Mini the duck, upon his
head, and fractured Air skull : be was taken up iu a stile of
iimensibility and carried to the Hospital, where be died wou
afterwards. Verdict—Accidental Death.
There was soother Inquest held at the Fox pniglie-bassae,
Sherrard Street, Golden-square, before the Coroner fur Wei&
minster, on the body of William Phillips, nit • 110,0110.
desk, who went to bed in his signal state of Imolai or lb
prattling night. siert note morning was foul(' dead.7par.
dot---Thed by Oar rzithaio. of God.