The National Register.
London, England, 1822-07-01 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTER

-- -
operated beneficially. With respect to the papers moved for by
the node arquik, he had written to know the cause of delay,
and the noble Marquis should be made acquainted with it as
curly as possible.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
Lord ELLEN BOROUGH moved the order of the day for
rereivilia die report of the Marriage Act Amendment Bill.
The 1.011 I) CIIANCEI.I.OII entered into a detail of all the
movisions of the Bill, alai gave it his decided opposition, lie
was ready to talinit, that a ntarriage ogee solemnized ought to be
valid, but he could never agree to the retro-•peetave clause in this,
because it would break down the rights of individuals, who had
exercised those rights under the sanction of existing laws. Ile
could not eolisent to make a large portion of the mutation, who
had olfended the law, happy, aria a larger 'minion, perhaps, who
had nut offended die law. unhappy. Baying stated cases of hard-
ship which must occur under the bill as it then stood, the noble
and learned Lord said he should not du his duty, unless he went
the length of making a proposition to the Douse, which would
enable him to retain' on the journals, that lie had not given his
assent to the retrospective part of the ball. Supposing it right
that marriages since MO, should made good and valid, what were
they about to du by the bill ? They were making marriages good,
but unjustly taking away the rights and interests of persons in
possession of rents and moths of estates on the legal notion that
montages were bad. It the delicacy of families could allow the
great conveyancers of the country to appear at the bar, the House
might know what injury the bill would do. In some instances
persons ninths:l to interests and remainder for lite, had sold those
interests, and he might ask what was to be done in those eases?
The pi rchaser could not be defraixletl of his legal purchase.—
The hill had passed over in the must indifferent manner the inte-
rests of persons in the lower classes of life,
. paying a sort of aria •
tocratind attention to the interests of higher classes. The noble
and learned Lord alluded to the defects in marriages by banns.—
The poor woman deceived by the person who monied her,
giving a false name, was as much Melded to have her feelings
considered, and her marriage made valid, as those who were ir-
regularly married by licence. It was clear she could not know
whether the person gave a right or a wrong mune. The children
were also innocent, yet sntt'ercrs by the fraud. This case under
marriage by banns was not provided for by the bill. They were
leaving such marriages by banns, and not regarding them at all.
It't re House could make such a distinction lie never could. The
L• noble and learned Lord proposed to move certain clauses. First,
that nothing in the act should render valid marriages declared
invalid by a competent court, before the passing of the act.—
Sessonilly, that no marriage which appeared invalid by the result
of any judicial proceeding previous to the passing of the bill,
should be made valid.—That the act should not nut make valid
:my marriage which before the passing of the act had been legally
brought 'Tito question. There were other clauses with respect to
Herds and the conveyance of property whioli protected the same
against the operation of the bill. All these clauses lie proposed
to submit, after the House should agree to the retrospective clause,
48 it stood amended by the CollllllilleC.
Lord ELLEN BOROUG II defended the retrospective clause.
.liter the noble and learned Lord and the !louse, had given their
-Assent to the proposition, that a marriage once solemnised ought
to be valid, the retrospective clause followed as the necessary
consequence of that admission. He was ready to entertain the
„:lauses propsed by die noble and teamed Lord, and particularly
t clause respecting marriages by banns, after the bill, as amended,
should be agnial to.
The LORI) CI lANCELLOR had no objection to discuss
clauses on the third reading of the bill. He declared his inten-
tion to owe against the retrospective clause.
The Earl of A RRO %V BY supported the retrospective
clause. but agreed with the Lord Chancellor that it might be
modified.

The LORD CHANCELLOR then put the question—ls it
your Lordships' pleasure to agree to the clauses as runended by
the committee ? The motion was carried.
He then put :lie questioti—ls it your Lordships' pleasure that
the clause so anientled stand part of the bill ?
The question wan decided in the affirmative, and the retros-
pective clause was subsequently agreed to, with the single dissent
of the Lord Chancellor.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL then moved, as an amendment,
that the bill should not extend to any marriage with respect to the
validity of which any suit is now pending.
The amendment was agreed to, and after some discussion the
bill was ordered to be read a third time to-mormw, when the
Lord Chant:, hioe's clauses will come under discussion. The
House then adjourned.
TistritsuaT. Jtl NE 27.
The Scotch Distilleries, the Brighton Pier, and the Westmin-
ster Improvement Bills, were brought up from the House of
Coninious, with several private bills.
A message informed the Lords that the Commons had agreed
to Doyle's Divorce Bill.
Mr. Tyndal presented accounts relative to the revenue of
Ireland.
CORN BILL—The Earl of LIVERPOOL stated, that it
would be convenient to several noble Lords if the discussion
expected to ensue on the second reading of the Corn Bill,
were deferred to another stage of the Bill, and all he wished to
know was the time the House would appoint fur the committal
of the Bill.
Lord ERSKINE said he bad an amendment to propose on
the third reading.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL then asked if there was any ob-
jection to the Bill being read a second time, with an leistand-
mg that the ditcussion should conic on when the bill is
cunwrit-
tel on Monday.
Esil CHEN said lie had no objection to the proposition of the
the noble Lord. He had then to pre ent a petition from North-
umberland, in which the petitionetsdisapproved of the Bill. and
stated that it would be ruinous to the country. The noble Earl
accordingly presented his petition, which was read and laid on
the table.
The Committee was then fixed fur Monday, and the thhd read-
, ing for Friary.
Lord REDSSDALE presented a petition from Surrey, cum-
plaining of agricultural distress. Laid on the table.
Tbe discussion on the Alarriage Act Amendment Bill was
fixed for to-mormw.
Lord CAWDOR presented a petition from certain acting
justices of the peace in the comity of Pembroke, praying fur par-
liamentary consideration of Weleli judicature, with a view to the
improvement thereof. The sohject occasioned a converaition
keen Lord Cawdor, Lind Redeslale, the Lord Chancellor,
Lord flute, the Marquis it Lansdowne. and other Lords, after
which the petition was read, and laid on the table.
The bills on the table: sue lea warded in different stages, and
the House adjourned.
FRIDAY, IFNI: 28.
The House met soon atter five o'clock.
Lord FITAWILLIAM presented several petitions from York-
shire, against the new Corn Bill. Laid on the table.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE presented a petition from a
;mu tied 11 Ulll4ll named Deason, now a prisoner in the King's
Bench, for a debt contracted before marriage, praying a cousitler-
atMn AN her ease, which the noble Lord declared to lie one of
considerable hardship. It appeare-t that the petitioner had been
arrested fur debt contracted alien a widow, and previous to her
marriage with her present husband. She applied to be discharged
ander the Insu Ivent Dab ors' Act, but the commessioneis held
Mat being unable, as a mauled woman, to make an assignment
or propel , they were %triable to give her, or her husband the
benefit of the act. The belle Earl moved that the petition be
lard on the table, ohs:ilia.; that a noble and learned liicirtl (Lord
Relit: dam) was expected to take it undo his consideration, and
if the :we turned out as w.. 61 Qickect‘d, tL. uubli; dud kale