The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-11 00:00:00

N°. 21,746,

quite monstr'o'us, judges and lawyers speaking as they have
done of late upon this subject."—Robert Southey.
People in general do not consider such marriages im-
proper. They cannot be proved to be improper by Scrip-
ture. The question is therefore one of expediency, and my
experience as a parochial minister induces me to think the
measure expedient. On these grounds, if ever a Convoca-
tion be called, and I be elected one of the proctors, I shall
move for an alteration in this regard in the table of kindled
and affinity. Until this be the case, I shall be glad to see
such marriages legalised by the civil rite."—Rey. Dr. Hook,
Dean of Chichester.
" Were the prohibitions founded on Scrietutte We ought,
at whatever sacrifice, to obey God rather than man; but I
cannot see the expediency of a law which, having no such
sanction, is observed only by the scrupulous, evaded by the
wealthy, and defied or disregarded by the poor."—Rev.
Cattein. Dale.
" It is not only not considered as prohibited,' but it is dis-
tinctly understood to be permitted ; and on this point nei-
ther the Divine law, nor the Rabbis, nor historical Judaism,
leaves room for the least doubt. 1 can only reiterate my
former assertions that all sophistry must split on the clear
and unequivocal words, Lev. xviii. 18, ' in her lifetime.' "
Evidence of Dr. Adler, the Chief Rabbi of the Jews in
England.
" He aliked them to reflect that the parting request of
many a dying wife Was that the man should marry her
sister, which was the best testimony to the feeling of woman
in this matter. Such marriages were not repugnant to
nature nor to Scripture; and if they did but look calmly at
these facts, sure he was that the day was not far distant
when the obnoxious law.would be repealed."— Speech of the
Rev. S. C. Miller, D.D.
"As no clear and strong case has been made out of im-
portant advantage to the public from such restriction, I take
my stand on the broad general principle that every restric-
tion is an evil in itself—the burden of proof lying upon the
advocates of any restriction to show its necessity." . . .
" You are at liberty to refer to me as approving of the aboli-
tion of the restriction on marriage to which you allude."—
Archbishop Whatley, in a letter to G. A. Crowder, Esq.
" I admit that a marriage with a wife's sister is not for-
bidden in Leviticus."—Bishop of London (Dr. Kay).
" Such marriages, I apprehend, ate nearly as frequent as
the circumstances which usuallyegive rise to them. I have'
not known any' social disidvantages attending them."—
Bishop M'llvain, Ohio, United States.
"Nothing is more common in almost all the States of
America than second marriages of this sort; and, so far
from being doubtful as to their moral tendency, they are
among us deemed the very best sort of marriages. In my
whole life I never the slightest suggestion against them,
founded on moral or domestic considerations."—Chief Jus-
tice Story, United Rates.
" Whence, I pray you, is this rigour of man against man,
which Geri has not required ? Who has given to men this
Power (of annulling or prohibiting marriage) ? Be it that
t.iey were holy men, and influenced by pious zeal ; why
should another's zeal infringe my liberty? Let any one be as
zealous and as holy as he will, so that he does not injure
his neighbour, or rob him of his liberty. Let them arm
themselves with the Divine law, and say, What God hath
joined together, let no man put asunder.' The union to
husband and wife is of Divine right, which is binding, how-
ever contrary it may be to human laws, and the laws of
men ought to yield to it without reserve. For if a man
leaves father and mother to cleave to his wife, how much
rather shall he trample under foot the contemptible and
unjust laws of men, and cleave to his wife ? And Pope,
Bishop, or officer, if he dissolve any marriage contracted in
opposition to merely human. law, is Antichrist, a violator
of nature, a traitor against the Divine Majesty; for that
sentence still stands, 'What God hath joined let no man
put asunder.' Perish, therefore, those cursed traditions of
men, which have been brought in only to multiply dangers,
offences, and miseries in the Church."—Luther.
" However inexpedient such marriages may be in certain
cases, I have been unable to discover their unscriptural
character. With these views I willingly subscribe the
opinion already given on the subject by my respected Me-
tropolitan, the Archbishop of Dublin."—The Bishop of
Limerick,
"As it is now admitted by the ripest scholars and most
accurate critics that there is not the slightest prohibition in
the Scriptures against the marriage with a deceased wife's
sister,. I consider the legal restriction to be both unjust and
most injurious, producing the deepest social evils."—The
Bishop of Down and Connor.
" I believe such marriages as you wish to make lawful
are already lawful, according to the letter and spirit of Holy
Scripture, and I hope the civil and ecclesiastical law will
speedily be made conformable to the Divine."—Dr. Close,
Dean of Carlisle.
" You are understood to state that you are of opinion that
so far as the interpretation of Scripture goes, either in the
Mosaic or Christian dispensation, there is nothing repug
nant to those marriages ?" —" There is nothing repugnant
in my opinion."—Evidence of Rev. R. C. Jenkins, M.A.
" The petition was probably entrusted to me in conse-
quence of my having declared without hesitation that the
marriage of a sister of a deceased wife was not prohibited by
the Levitical law."—The late Dr. Copleston, Bishop of
Landaff.
" I shall only add that 'fill persons who voted for the Act
of Parliament which legalised such marriages of that de-
scription as had taken place—nay, all who had an oppor-
tunity of opposing that act, and did not oppose it, must be
regarded as' subscribing to the declaration that these mar-
riages were not in opposition to the Word of God."—The
late Bishop of Meath.
"Without pursuing the subject further, I shall give it at
my opinion that the marriage in question is not against
either nature or the law of God."—Rev. T. Binney.
"Are marriages of this description considered in Ger-
many to be at at all contra bonos, mores ?"—" Not at all.
So far from their being considered ' contra bonos mores,' the
feeling of the people of Germany is undoubtedly in favour
of such marriages."—Evidence of A. Bach, Esq.
" Socially speaking, if a case was made out that morality
would be endangered by the Bill, that would be a reason for
rep,. :ng it; but he had not heard it established that such
.iger could arise. Marriage being a civil rite, they were
pound to make that civil rite co-extensive with the feelings
of the country. He had therefore come to the conclusion
that it was his duty to support the second reading of the
Bill."—Speech of the late Lord Herbert.
"He was entitled to say that the evils anticipated from
permitting those marriages here had not manifested them-
sal ves in those countries ; for if they had, the law which
had authorised them would not have been suffered to con
tinue for 12 months."—Speech of Lord Chief Justice Cock-
burn.

"He had before stated his belief that if the matter came
to be investigated before the courts, it would turn out that
the marriage contemplated in this Bill was in Scotland a
lawful marriage ; and he had good reason for saying that
that was the opinion of an hon. baronet than whom no per-
son ever stood higher in the Church of Scotland—Sir H.
Moncrieff. For himself, having coma to the deliberate
opinion that the marriage in question was not forbidden by
the law of Leviticus, he came also to the opinion that the
connection was not a crime, and that the marriage was
effectual foe civil purposes."—Speech of the Lord Advo-
cate of Scotland (Rutherfurd.)
" I express my conviction that Scripture says not one
word against marriage with a deceased wife's sister. Surely
it is not a crime, and, if it be not, the law that constitutes
it so must be, for the worst of all crimes is an evil and un-
just law."—Rev. Geo. Gilfillan, Dundee.
" The prohibition of such marriages is, in my judgment,
sanctioned neither by Scripture, nor by physiology, nor by
expediency."—Rev H. Renton, Kelso, Scotland.
" If this marriage be lawful in the sight of God, then I
go upon the broad ground that, in such a case, no man has
a right to impose a restriction on his fellow-man which
God has not imposed ; that the doing so can only bring a
snare upon the conscience, and be the occasion of sin ; and
that no sanction of human law can be expected ultimately
to succeed in enforcing what a man feels is no transgres-
sion of the law of God. . • " That it is lawful, accord-
ing to the Word of God, I consider incontrovertibly proved
by the passages in Leviticus of which I feel sure I have
established the only correct translation."—Rev. C,
Goodhart, M.A.
" The petition from the City of London in favour of this
marriage was signed by a large number of persons, and
among others by the Lord Mayor, Governor and Deputy-
Governor of the Bank of England, and a considerable
number of the Directors of the establishment, 59 private
bankers, by the Chamberlain of the City of London, by
237 merchants, 146 solicitors, 124 barristers, and 61 phy-
sicians. It was his good fortune to be acquainted with a
large number of persons who signed this petition, and be
could say, from his knomledge of their characters, that
their opinions were entitled to the greatest weight and at-
tention."—Speech of Lord Overstone.
"That the enactments of the Levitical law are entirely
misinterpreted when applied in condemnation of marriage
with a deceased wife's sister, was the decided judgment of
Mr. 'Wesley, the founder of our societies ; and I believe that
similar views have since been entertained by many of those
among us who have been led by circumstances carefully to
examine the matter, and whose competency to judge of such
a question has given great weight to their conclusion."—
Rev. Dr. Bunting.
"He had given his best attention to the arguments ad-
duced to show that there was a Divine prohibition against
these marriages, but he was satisfied in his own mind that
no such prohibition existed."...." Then came the question
as to the effects of this measure upon society, and he thought
that the great preponderance of arguments, and facts upon
which arguments were grounded, were in favour of the alte-
ration of this law."—Speech of Sir George Grey.
"There was no prohibition of the wife's sister, except
during the lifetime of the wife."—Rev. Professor Robinson,
New York, author of "Researches in Palestine."
"From the fact that the prohibition of marriage with the
sister of a wife is restricted to the lifetime of the wife, it is
evident that under this prohibition is not comprehended
marriage with the sister of a deceased wife, the limitation
`in her lifetime' leaving the marriage freo after her death"
—Cardinal Cajetan.
"Moses, in Leviticus, prohibited certain marriages and
permitted others in the same degree. For he prohibited
marriage with the wife of a brother even after his death,
and did not prohibit marriage with the sister of a wife, un-
less in her lifetime ; and, consequently, did not prohibit it
with the sister of a deceased wife."—Cardinal Bellarmine.
" Do you construe that passage in Leviticus (xviii., IS) as
prohibiting marriage with a deceased wife's sister, or merely
as saying that a man should not take two wives together, at
the same time, being so related?—Certainly, that verse ap-
pears to have the latter meaning, that two sisters should not
be li'ing together in the same house as wives of the same
person." . . "Is such a marriage hold by your church
as prohibited in Scripture ?"—" Certainly not. It is con-
sidered a matter of ecclesiastical legislation."—Cardinal
Wiaeman.
givennrst
cars,te(sthtr%
marrying " The prohibition in Leviticus xviii. 18, being limited to
existence of any
a Wife's sister during the life of the first wife, ne-
cessarilygaliesvtimrtuodaellyo;insdmetaticointliyn,g;vhiimehplii:s, itiiiiemnaouny:
death of the prohibition against marrying
the
Dromore.
" He hadhisvv i f eb.:s—t
al'tthee:
ißev.n teD the.r, tr:nteDl ifeetasrn of
ad-
duced to show that there was a Divine prohibition against
these marriages, but he was satisfied
that no such prohibi-
tion existed. Then came the question as to the effects of
this measure upon society, and he thought that the great
prep of arguments and facts was in favour of the
alteration of this law."—Speech of Sir George Grey.
"From From the best consideration which Ica give to it, it
appears to me that Lord Bury's Bill offers : gfair and rea-
sonable compromise amid the conflict' •
mg opinions respect-
ing the marriage of a deceased wife's sister."—The Rev. T
i Hartwell Home, B.D.
4i From Vali= considerations, such marriages here have