The Sun.
London, England, 1839-03-06 00:00:00

IMPERIAI.7, PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF LORDS, illiztem 5..
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the
Woolsack at Five o'Clock.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM presented a petition
from a parish in Liaeolnshire against any alteration in
the Corn-laws.
Lord RALEIGH presented petition from various
places in Essex against any alteration in the Corn-laws.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH wished to know
from the Noble Marquis opposite how soon it
was likely that the Chancellor of Ireland would
be in his place, because he had two or three cases of
interference that he 'considered very important to be
brought forward, but in deference to the . Noble and
Learned Lord, he. did not wish to bring theM forward
in his absence, provided he was likely to he in his
place shortAy, and provided the Noble Marquis thought
it necessary that be should be present, although
the Nolole and Learned Lard had seemed to throw
the kraos arising from those cases upon the Government
of Irel Ldrather than to take it to himself.
The Marquis of NORMANBY said that his Noh!e
and Learned Friend was in possession of all the facts f
those cases, and therefore it would be desirable that he
should be present when the subject of them was brought
on. He could not say with precision when he
would be here, as he was at present exercising
the office of Lord Chief Justice, though he had
intended to be here by this time.
CHARTISTS.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM wished to know,
from the Noble Lord opposite, whether any information
had reached her Majesty's Government, that certain
persons called Chartists bad armed themselves.
Viscount MELBOURNE said he was perfectly
aware that a certain set of persons, who were called
Chartists, h d armed themselves.
Lord MI LVILLE presented a petition front Edin-
burgh, praying for Church accommodation.
Lord FOLEY presented several petitions, praying
for an alteration in the Corn-laws.
A NOBLE LORD presented a petition from a place in
Scotland, praying for additional Church accommodation.
Lord REDESDALE presented petitions from
Yarmouth, Wokingham, and Oawestry, against any al-
teration in the Corn-laws.

The Marquis of NORMANBY laid on the table,
returns of the Clergy Reserves of Canada.

MARRIAGE ACT.

The Bishop of LONDON wished that a Noble
Lord had- been in his place, who was in the habit of
taking an interest in the Board of Guardians, before he
had risen to wake the observations he was about to submit,
but as those observations would not affect the Board
of Guardians, the absence of that Noble Lord was the

less to be regretted. His observations would relate to
a subject that was no otherwise important than as it
bore on the marriage law. Their Lordships were all aware
that about two :years ago a Bill passed, altering in a great
degree the law of marriage in order to satisfy certain
Dissenters, who held it to be a grievance to be married
according to the religious forms of theEstablishedChurch.
Amongst other things it was at that time apprehended
that that Bill would afford facilities to clandestine mar-
riages, and the petitions he held in his hand would show
that apprehension was not altogether unfounded. The
number of marriages that had been solemnised since the
passing of the Act otherwise than according to the
forms of the Church had been very insignificant—so
insignificant, that had the Legislature known, it
probably would have hesitated before it had made
such an innovation on the then (stablished law
as this Bill made. However, whatever number of
Dissenters felt themselves to be aggrieved, it was the
duty of their Lordships to afford them relief ; the
question was whether the relief provided would
not be attended with more serious cause of
grievance than the comparatively small grievance that
existed before. He held in his hand two pe-
titions, one from the Board of Guardians of the
Oundle Union, and the other from the Clergy in the
neighbourhood, and they tended to show that the law as
it now stood, was not calculated to heighten but rather
to lower the tone of public feeling as to the marriage
standard. Theirwas something that might, perhaps, excite
a smile in the circumstance towhich hewas about to allude,
which was the fact referred to in one of the petitions,
of a case of marriage, solemnised by the superintendent
of the Oundle Union, betlCreen a young man and his
wife, who was his grandmother—(Laughter)—and
who were therefore incapable of contracting a marriage.
He did not mean to impute blame to any of the parties,
concerned, except the two persons themselves. With
respect to the conduct of the Registrar-General, he
was a person for whom he (the Bishop of London)
entertained very great respect, and although he
had committed an error to a certain extent, it should
be regarded with leniency, as mistakes were likely
to occur in the administration of a law which had intro-
duced such important and extensive innovations into
the law of the country. But because it was an inno-
vation, the parties who were to administer it, should
have proceeded with the greatest caution, so as
to prevent those evils and offences against mo-
rality and religion, which were likely to arise.
The Right Rev. Prelate then read the petition at
length, and proceeded. He regretted that the Regis-
trar had not taken the advice of Ecclesiastical Lawyers,
who would have at once decided that the marriage was
within the prohibited degrees. As soon as the objection
had been pointed out the Registrar, had issuer! an
injunction, but it was too late, for the marriage had been
already solemnized. He had also a petition from the
Board, of Guardians to the same effect. There was
ano•Caer complaint made by the Clergy who bad signed the
petition—that the marriage had been performed without
the usual notice, and in defiance of the caution
of the Vicar. He thought it was the duty of the
Registrar to institute some inquiry into the matter.
He had no complaint to make of the conduct of the
Registrar-General, but ho hoped he would be excused
for calling their Lordships' attention to the fact, in
order that some measures might he taken for rendering
such a case impossible again. He had intended at first
to have moved, for the whole of the correspondence
that had passed between the parties and the Registrar-
General, but he did not now see that any good end
would be served by so doing, and as he did
not wish to give pain to the several parties unnecessarily,
he would not then do so. While he was upon this
subject their Lordships, he hoped, would allow him to
make a few observations upon another Act which passed
at the same time, he alluded to the Act for the Regis-
tration of Births. The Marriage Act would. do but
little harm, because it would never be much acted on,
but the Act for the Registration of Births had done much
harm to the Church, not as an establishment, though in
that way she suffered _much, but she felt more because

that she lost her influence over the lower orders. One
distressing case had occurred lately. It was brought
under his notice by a surgeon, who wrote him at the
suggestion of the mother of a child which had not been
baptized, and the clergyman of course refused to bury
it with the usual ceremonies. He (the Bishop of
London) was obliged to say that the clergy-
man was not only right, but that he was ex-
pressly forbid to do so. On inquiry he found
that the mother had been informed, that having regis-
tered the birth of the child, there was nothing else re-
quired, and of course, the feelings of the parents were
much hurt at the want of the usual religious solemnities.
It was unfortunate that any slur should have been
cast upon Ecclesiastical registration, which was closely
connected with baptism, and the instructions issued
by the Registrar-General were calculated, though
doubtless unintentionally, to produce in the
lower orders, a disregard of the initiatory rite of reli-
gion. In conclusion the Right Rev. Prelate complained
of the provision by which a penalty of 101. was imposed
upon every Clergyman who interred a corpse without
giving notice to the registrar. That provision, he
said unjustly reflected on the Clergyman, and was too
vague and indefinite, because it did not specify to which
Registrar notice was to be given.
The LORD CHANCELLOR. said the Right
Rev. Prelate had truly stated the facts of the case.
At the same time, although the marriage was be-
tween a grandmother and a grandson, the grandmother
was under age. It had unfortunately happened, that
when the caveat was transmitted to the Registrar-
General, that officer was absent, or the answer would
not have been sent as had been—(Hear, hear)—and
when the Superintendent-Registrar was subsequently
written to, the marriage had taken place. The
question now to be considered was, whether the public
had full security under the law as it stood against the
recurrence of similar instances. He would there-

fore state what were the regulations adopted
in the Registrar-General's Office in such cases.
Upon a caveat being entered the Superintendent
Registrar sent a copy to the party giving notice of the
marriage, requiring to be informed whether the objec-
tions were admitted or denied ; if denied, the party ob-