The Sun.
London, England, 1862-02-19 00:00:00

BILL.

Mr. HADFIELD having moved the second reading of
this bill,
Mr. NE WDEGATE objected to the measure, as the
taking away the reservation invested in corporations by the
Test and Corporations Act would have the effect of converting
such corporations into political clubs,and would operate most
prejudicially as regarded the Church of England. It would
have the effect of creating confusion among the institutions
of the country, and therefore, without any desire to con-
trol or limit any man's freedom or rights he considered
this measure would be the means of diverting cor-
porations from their legitimate administrative functions,
and making them, as ho had said, mere political cluVs
He therefore should oppose the measure as being unneces-
sary and uncalled for, and he hoped the hon. member
would not proceed further with the measure. If he did, he
would move that it be read a second time that day six
months.

Mr. SOTHERON ESTCOURT also opposed the mea-
sure, and hoped that the Government would take the mat-
ter into their own hands.

Sir GEORGE GREY said he did not consider that the
measure was of such importance as to induce the
Government to take it up, and that it might be with greater
propriety left in the hands of private members. He did not
think that the measure would have the injurious effect ap-
prehended, and he should be ready, as on former occasions,
to support the second reading of the bill.
Sir MORETON PETO also supported the measure, and
expressed his belief that instead of operating prejudicially
to the Established Church, it would have the very opposite
tendency, as it would do away withit declaration which had
long been a source of heart burning, and had induced dis-
affection to that church.

Mr. WALPOLE said he could see no practical evil
which the passing of the measure would inflict, and he
shou d support the second reading of it.
The house then divided, when there appeared—.
For the second reading
Against it 54
Majority for the second reading —9
The bill was then ordered to be committed on Friday
next.

MARRIAGES OF AFFINITY BILL.

Mr. M. MI LNES moved the second reading of this bill.

Colonel LYGON said on former occasions bills to a
similar effect had been submitted to the house, but
they had always been put down for discussion at a
later period of the session. At the present time
there were many members connected with Irish and
Scotch constituencies who had not yet arrived in
London, and as the question involved in the measure
created great interest in those two countries, he thought it
unfair to bring it on for discussion till they were present,
and had an opportunity of fully considering and discussing
it. So fat' as regarded the principle of the measure, he
considered that it would lead to endless litigation and
confusion. If they took away the prohibition which
prevented a man from marrying his wife's sister, he
could not see that they could with justice maintain the
prohibition which prevented a man from marrying his wife's
niece. If they once broke ground, and swept away one,
they must go on until they swept away all prohibitions at
present on the statute book. If it was argued that there
was not in the Old or New Testaments anything
which prevented a man from marrying his wife's
sister, then they must hold, upon the same ground,
that there was nothing in either of them which prohibited
the other prohibitions as regarded affinity, and must come
to the conclusion that the prohibition against a man
marrying his wife's niece or his daughter-in-law was no
unbinding as the one preventing him from marrying his
wife's sister. It has been said that the Bishops of
London and Durham had signified their approval of the
removal of the prohibition as regarded marriage with
a deceased wife's sister ; but though at one time he believed
those right reverend prelates. hfid expressed themselves
somewhat in that manner, they had since changed their
opinion, and were opposed to the removal of the prohibition.
He contended that the Act of 1835 did not bear the con-
struction put upon it in respect of these marriages; and
whatever might be stated in respect of them, he was certain
that very few of such marriages existed among the poorer
classes. (Hear, hear.) He had the statement on this sub-
ject of an hon. gentleman who was once an ornament of
that house, Vice-Chancellor Sir William Page Wood, who
said that he had made inquiries in the parishes of St. Mar-
garet and St. John, and he had found but very few.

Mr. MONCKTON MlLNES—Seventy-four,
Colonel LYGON—If there were 74, they ought to have
more satisfactory evidence on the point than the statements
of an anonymous society. Sir William Page Wood had
only found two such cases, and two others had he believed
been sent him since. As regarded the petitions which had
been presented in favour of the measure, it was easy to
multiply these when two guineas were freely allowed for
every four hundred signatures obtained; but petitions so
got up were no criterion as to the feeling of the public on
the subject, and were unworthy of any attention. He
trusted, therefore, that a further examination of the mea-
sure that house would refuse to sanction, and prevent at
once all further discussion on the subject. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. COLLIER considered that the burden of proof lay
on those who opposed this measure. As to a man being
disqualified from marrying any particular woman the ten-
der of proof lay upon those who forbid the banns, and not
upon the parties who wished the marriage consummated.
Those marriages were sanctioned in every country in
Europe except their own, and putting aside what was
called the moral instinct of parties, he would ask, was
there any prohibition in the Scriptures against them.
There was none in the New Testament, but then they
were thrown back upon a chapter in Leviticus, and
to one verse in that chapter. But that one verse did not
bear out the argument of the opponents of this measure, for
it simply stated that a man should not marry his wife's
sister during his wife's lifetime, but it did not say that he
should be prevented from doing so after his wife's death.
(Hear, hear.) And besides, they had it in evidence taken
on this subject, and given by one of the chief Rabbis in
London, that the Jews were in the habit of constantly con-
tracting such marriages.
rLEFT SPEAKING.]