The Sun.
London, England, 1855-04-25 00:00:00

lieved the bill would be prodUCtive of public injury, mo•

rally, religiously, and social y., From the earliest time
down to the present the prohibitions against marriage
within certain degrees of consanguinity had been the
same, and theref ire, when A prop: ition was made to
alter or do away with prohibitions that had existed for
at least 1,500 years, it would become the house to pause
before they a-sented to it. The ozdy alterations made
in the laws relating to marriages in this country since it
was a Christian country was made by Lord Lyndhurst's
act in 1835, which, he believed, to be a wise act ;
and therefore in reality this was the first attempt to do
away with marriages within the prohibited degrees. He
would ask, in the first place, was this change called for
—was it called for by the people of Scotland ? The
hon. gentleman who introduced the bill exempted
Scotland from it. (Hear, hear.) Was it called for
by the people of Ireland ? A witness before the
Commissioners told them the feelings of the people,
both Protestants and Roman Catholics were utterly op-
posed to those marriages ; and, with regard to the people
of England, the Commissioners themselves told them,
by their report, that the feelings of the clergy and people
revolted from such marriages. There were but two ar-
guments put forward in favour of this bill ; the one was
that the existing law put an undue restraint upon religious
liberty ; the other was that it prevented a widower from
providing a mother for an orphan family. With regard
to the first argument, he should say that, it religious
liberty was inconsistent with purity and domestic hap-
piness, it would not be right to allow it ; and as to the
second, he maintained that the aunt was naturally the
best guardian of a sister's children, and therefore he
would prevent her, if he could, from becoming per-
haps a bad step-mother. The right honourable
and learned gentleman entered at much length
into the religious part of the question, and con-
tended that according to the law of Leviticus, a man
canint any more marry his own sister than he can his
wife's sister ; for, according to that law, it was stated
that for two brothers to marry one sister, one
after the other, was an abomination, and surely
that prohibition extended equally to two sisters
marrying one ' man, one after the other. That
was the religious view of the question, which he
feared he ha i very imperfectly explained, though he
craned it had great weight with him in coming to a con-
clusion on this question. With regard to the social ad-
vantages which it was urged this bill would promote, ho
believed that if the existing law were altcred the wife's
sister would be prevented by instinctive delic icy and
propriety of feeling from living under the roof of her
sister while that sister lived, and therefore the chances
would be diminished, instead of increased, of providing
the best guardian for an orphan family. It was said
that this bill was intended to promote the morality of
the lower classes ; but after a diligent search of
eight or nine years, the commissioners had ascer-
tained that the breaches of the existing law stood
in the proportion of about 100 among the upper
classes, about 1,400 among the middle classes, while
among the lower orders the number was only about
50. (Hear.) He therefore hoped the house would reject
this measure, which would irreparably injure the interests
of the many to indulge the desires of a few. He con-
cluded by moving that the bill be read a second time this
day six months. (Ff ear.)
• The ATTORNEY-GENERAL supported the bill.
He contended that the existing law was an injurious and
tyrannical law, and could no longer be allowed to re-
main on the statute-book. He denied that the whole
question, so far as religion was concerned, turned upon
the point as to whether there was a prohibition in the
written law of God or not. He maintained that, to his
such marriages
n gof the
Levitical
apprehension, the passage in Leviticus bore a directly
opposite meaning to that put upon it by the right hon.
. and learned
w gentleman,
referred
onlyan td thato
tbe
thefau t realoi a llln
being prohibited while the wife was living, and not at
all after she had ceased to live. In the Roman Catholic
Church those marriages were treated as matters of dis-
nmtpeorsseosfutchhiareesoturnicituiy(linnasn.od
athvgery
dis-
cipline and dispensation, and in every Protestant coun-
try of Europe, except our own, no such prohibition by
law existed as now existed in England. He asked when
Europe, Protestant and Catholic, were divided in opi-
nionwho duipdonntohteamgreeaeniwngithof
ttihieemLeoviiititchalelapw.,
wt what
adnfi toyrtr
hi the'o,l,hseie,
right
dogmaticallyhad
Dissenters
large portion of the Protestants, did not
hwhole we
body
marriages as contrary to the divine law.
the religious views of the question. With Those were
regard to
the social point of view, it could be shown
consequences likely to ensue by repealing the tl at the
law, as pointed out by the hon, and learned exists ,g
gets leman
(Mr. Walpole) were purely speculative, and did nit
contain one partiAe of fact. The I
. and leas wed
member then went on to say that it walso"
was manifested
amongst the
superior classes that a strong desire w
the legalisation of these marriages, but
it was
for
more par-
ticularly amongst the lower classes, to whim liberty to
contract marriages with a deceased wife's i t
temptations of the strongest kind to immoralityr-r9
s erwould be,in
too many instaeces, a boon beyond description. As t
was, the present state of the law effered to these people
bitation. But, beyond these considerations
no good in repealing the existing law 2 i i
swas there
question
had been called a woman's question' but he maintained
thatchildren's it was a motherless
question. Put the
case to any woman—ask her if she, a mother with young
children, was stricken with disease,
and knew she
inuAt soon be removed from this world,
a world, wh .thee
she would choose her offspringa torelative, he left to the
tender and fostering care of
other woman—a stranger whom her or of some
aftqwards which , . husband might
marry world pia prefer t filgaPi