The Sun.
London, England, 1855-05-10 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS-YESTERDAY

EDUCATION BILL.
Mr. WALPOLE gave notice on the part of :-;ir J.
Pakington, that that right hon. gentleman wou.d to-
morrow move that the second reading of his bill :would
be postponed till the sth of June.
THE SUNDAY BEER BILL.
24r. H. BERKELEY gave notice that he ini ended
to move for a committee to inquire into the work tog of
an ad passed last session for tha further regulat "on of
the sale of beer on the Lord's-day. He propok ed to
bring forward his motion on St. Boniface's day. (1 (ear.)

CIVIL SERVICE.
Mr. MACARTNEY gave notice that, on the sth of
June, he should, in the absence of the bill, so lot L; pro-
mised by the Government, move for leave to intr Alice
a bill to alter the law affecting the civil service.
MARRIAGES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Mr. HEADLAM, on rising to move the second read-
ing of the above bill, presented several petition from
Scotland and the North of England, in favour •xf the
same. The hen, gentleman said, in proposing this mea-
sure, he was not seeking to make any trifling or mere
theoretic improvement of the law, but was endeav( nring
in the most earnest manner in his power to repre a au
evil the magnitude of which he could scarcely de Icribe
without what would seem to be exaggeration, whir. i was
lowering the character, destroying the moralit3 . and
depraving the manners of the people in the no -them
--parts of this island. The hon. gentleman after q toting
some statistics showing the great number of llega,l
marriages now contracted in Scotland, and th•- evil
effects they produced ou the moral character f the
people, concluded by moving the second reading • 4 tha
bill.

The LORD-ADVOCATE, though he could no. pro-
mise to support the bill in all its details, yet consif ering
it was a praiseworthy attempt to grapple with a subject
the evils of which he fully admitted, should not of rpose
the second reading of the bill.
Mr. ELLIOTT opposed the second reading, 1, Ting
that the Lord-Advocate would himself introduce mea-
sure that would really grapple with the evils f the
question, which this bill would not do. He move, that
the bill be read a second time that day 6 months.
Lord LOVAINE considered the present bill wt s cal-
culated to mitigate at least a portion of the ex tsting
evils, and therefore he thought it would be unf tir to
wait till the Scotch members should agree among them-
selves to a revision of the whole of the marriage 1 me of
Scotland.
Mr. NAPIER considered the difficulty of d ealing
with this question was, that the people of Scotia: al did
not regard any religious ceremony requisite for mai riage:
He also objected to the facility of minors to contract
marriage in Scotland, the mere fact of people of tender
years declaring they took each other for man an. i wife
being at present sufficient to bind them irrevocably for
life. He thought this bill would not have the efl s3t of
remedying the evils now complained of, and theref c re he
should feel bound to support the amendment.
Lord DUNCAN also supported the amendment.. He
found that this bill, while intended to legislate chief/7 for
the two border oounties of Northumberland and Itini-
berlatrd, would introduce the greatest possible cony usion
uto the whole law of marriage in Scotland. He W. 19 far
from saying that some measure was not requia.t.d to
amend the existing law of Scotland, but it should be
done in a comprehensive manner, and therao..e he
trusted the English members would assist him in eject-
ing the bill now before the house.
Mr. DUNLOP supported'the bill, on the ground ,that
it would be at least a modification of the existing e
Mr. WALPOLE considered the bill would f..il in
remedying the evils of the present law. The pt nalty
proposed by the bill for contracting an illegal marriage
was 101. for the first offence, and 501. for a seccrid of-
fence ; he was sure that penalty would be willingl7 paid
in most cases, and therefore, on the plea of putting down
immorality, it would not at all grapple with it. Ife ad-
mitted that the anomalies of the marriage law in Scotland
were very great, and he trusted that the Lord-Advocate
and the Government would take upon themselves to in-
troduce a bill that would assimilate the laws of ma,-riage
in Scotland with those of England. For those masons
he should be obliged to support the amendment.
Mr. HEADLAM replied, contending that no ade-
quate argument had been brought forward by hon. mem-
bers who opposed the bill to show that it would not have
the effect of at least mitigating the evils of the present
system, and he should press the question to a division.
Sir G. GREY said that with respect to the appeal
made to the Government to bring in a bill to grapple
with the whole subject of the marriage law of Scotland,
he feared, judging from past experience of similar
attempts, it would not be prudent for the Government to
make any such pledge. A bill for that purpose had been
brought in by a former government ; but it was
unanimously opposed by the whole of the Scotch mem-
bers and it was unsuccessful. But he regarded
the present bill would affect merely the humble
classes, and would not touch those in a hi; .her
position who contracted the same sort of irregular mar-
nines. (Hear, hear.) He therefore put it to the hon.
and learned member (Mr. Headlam) whether it was
worth while to press the question to a division ?
After a few remarks from Mr. INGRAM and Mr. J. G.
PRILLIMOBE,
The house divided, when the numbers were—
For the second reading 4O
For the amendment, 143
Majority
—lO3
So the bill was lost.

ECCLESIASTICAL PROPERTY (IRELAND)
BILL.
This bill went through committee, and was ordered
to be reported to-morrow.
MARRIAGE LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
Sir W. HEATHCOTE resumed the acljourarn,nt of
the debate on the second reading of this bill. He said
that the law at present existing with respect to mar-
riage might be considerably improved, and that the
course that had been pursued in Germany might perhaps
be adopted ; but he was afraid that the present bill was,
to say the least of it, a short-sighted legislation
believed that the verses in Leviticus might be cons.truede
both for and against this bill. If, however, there w
any doubt upon the subject, he thought that d .bas
t
should be given in favour of the law as it at present
stood.
Mr. PHINN objected to the proposition made by the
right hon. baronet. He totally objected to the
argu-
ment that those who supported the present bill were
opposed to settled legislation. He believed that the law
as it at present existed was totally against the edict,
given by Holy Writ. Could it be doubted, looking at
that holy work, that kings and princes who were
living in polygamy bad been looked upon with spe-
cial favour. (Hear, bear.) He believed that, loo1;ing
at scripture generally, no man could find tiny
authority for disputing the provisions of the present bill.
He thought the passages in Leviticus and Deuteronomy
were rather in favour than against the present hill.
Years ago the law upon the subject of marriage was
looked to in a very different light to that in which it
was viewed at present. Formerly the different pro-
visions of every church were looked to ; that was not
,The case at present. Marriage was now not
tecclesiastical law, but a common question. (Hear.)
had
to been said that this bill bad been brought forwvrd
lowaevrOur the upper classes. His opinion was that the
than tees suffered more by the present marriage law
• e aristocracy, and that the adoption of the rre-
the house
Would effect the best results. He hoped t:iat
the bill by such give its assent to the second readine• of
country that they large majority as would show to the
Mr. R. I,4diaere in earnest on the subject.
that the present at tlaought there could be no doubt
the foundation*of
tn,eif,Farried, would touch not only
itself, because it craalrY, but those of Christendom
ad Upon
come
es
tohobuysethostoe
revise the decision thatedb
learned divines,
thdeelibeerhaut7l,.
who, after
adopted the Thirty-nine Artie egreat
erecerr_were not to be
It was said that such divines as rita;ilB
considered, because at the time
under the domination of Henry they were
course that Cranmer had pursued orge it;e:eudwtilti
was asked to give his assent to the marriage of twhla-2. he
with Anne Boleyn. (Hear, hear.) He
considerable alarm upon any measure that Was
to reverse the decision of ages, and to put aside the
laws of morality which had been adopted by their an.
°esters. (Hear, hear.) Milton had thought and written
Upon this subject, and his opinions were entitled, as
were also those of 2/lelancthon, to the greatest conside-
tliti", and they were totally averse to that which V. a
Abe by the present bill. (Hear, hear.) He asked
hs
h....te disagree with a bill which made that legal in
Isilerand.
Brlticb,i;ould be monstrous in Scotland. (He r.)
bill, and d• B supported the second reading of the
bon and • le,:edulgales:bdesignated the arguments of the
an unsound end .
.er for Plymouth (Mr. R. Palmer)
sent bill was not housepasaeficuicil•thelle believed that if the pro
of persecution whichwouldabet con -;o
a •
was sgainit all notions of morality

The SPZAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock. Before
business was proceeded with, the right hon. gentleman
expressed his grateful acknowledgments for the kind
indulgence which the house had extended to him on
Monday and Tuesday evenings, and expressed a hope
that the impossibility of making a house on Tuosday
evening, which he believed was entirely attributable to
himself, had not been the cause of inconvenience to any
hon. members. (Hear, hear.)
The following bills were read a third time and passed :
—Birmingham Canal Navigations, Glasgow W,lter,
Kelso Bridge, Kingston-upon-Thames Improvement,
and Plymouth Great Western Docks.
The following bills were considered and ordered to be
read a third time :—Abingdon Railway ; Banff, Mae-
dtiff,•and Turriff Railway ; Commercial-road ;- Cork and
Youghal RailwxylSenminster and Ledbury-road; Lime-
rick and Castleconnell Railway ; Manchester Improve-
ment ; Renfrew Police and Improvement ; Swansea
Docks ; Rhymney Railway.
PETITIONS.
Petitions were presented by Mr. H. Brown from
Liverpool, against church rates ; by Mr. Hadfield with
the same prayep ; by Mr. H. Berkeley, various petitions
froiWßristol against church rates ; also from the com-
positors of the Morning Post, praying for the rep3al of
the Sunday Beer Bill ; by Mr. Horsfall, from Liverpool,
against the Marriage Bill now before the house ; by
Mr.-G-. Berkeley, 5 petitions from Gloucester, against
church rates ; by Sergeant Shee, a number of petitions
from various parts of Ireland, praying the house to pass
the Tenants Compensation Bill ; by Sir G. Grey, from
the Wesleyans of South Shields, against the sale of in-
toxicating drinks on Sundays ; by Mr. H. W. Wick-
ham, 2 petitions from Yorkshire to the same offset ;
by Mr. Pellatt, a number of petitions from various me-
tropolitan parishes, in favour of the bill for legalising
marriage' with a deceased wife's sister ; by Mr. Bass,
from Derby, complaining of the mismanagement of the
War.