The Sun.
London, England, 1854-06-14 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON. WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 14, 1854.

Sublime Porte being a Power completely worn
out, and therefore to be got rid of with all con-
venient despatch. Turkey henceforth has claims
upon the aid and upon the friendship of
Western Europe. Turkey has approved herself
worthy of being admitted to the fraternity of the
civilised, as we may hope she may one day be
among the community of the chief, Powers of
Christendom. She Las vindicated her right
to be numbered among the nations of the
earth—among the nations to be preserved, and
not to bo dismembered —by the generous
magnanimity and enlightenment of her Sultan
ABD-AIL-MEDJID, by the valour and constancy
of her gallant troops, by the skill and
heroism of their Commander OMER PACIIA,
aud, among the many brilliant incidents in
the campaign in the Danubian Provinces, by that
glorious and hitherto successful defence of Silis-
tria, which appeals to our sympathies, arouses our
enthusiasm, and commands our admiration.

A question of immense importance, involving
the well-being and happiness of thousands of her
MAJESTY'S subjects, and exercising no inconsider-
F able influence on the national morality, was last
night discussed in the Upper House on the second
reading of the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes
Bill. This measure is mainly founded on the Re-
port of the Commissioners appointed in 1851 to
inquire into the interesting topic. It, however,
differs in some respects therefrom, chiefly in the
constitution of the tribunal about to be invested
with authority to pronounce a divorce a vinculo
matrimonti, and also in sending vases going merely
for one a mensa et thoro to the Court of Chancery,
where they may be brought to a hearing before
any one of the seven Equity Judges. On the
contrary, the Commissioners recommended that all
matrimonial disputes should be brought under the
same jurisdiction, viz., of a court consisting
of a Vice-Chancellor, a Common Law Judge, and
au Ecclesiastical Judge. In other matters it only
slightly varies from the suggestions of the Learned
Commissioners.
In one point there was perfect unanimity. Al]
persons agreed in the impropriety and inexpe-
diency of the existing system, and looked anxi-
ously for the much-required improvements. But
here the agreement ended, for while some per-
sons, like Lord REDESDALE, would insist on the
indissolubility of the nuptial tie, the others would
extend the remedy, and make a dissolution of the
marriage contract open to all who had well-
founded grounds of complaint against their part-
ners, such as would prevent the possibility of a
reunion. Some would only afford relief within
the narrowest limits, surrounding the applications
with so many difficulties as to deter the great
majority- of claimants, and also making it a
very expensive luxury, while others would fling
open the portals of the new tribunal to every bona
fide suitor, and render justice to the humble as
well as to the wealthy sufferer.
It was the object of the Commissioners, as it
now is of Lord CRANWORTII, to steer a middle
course between these conflicting opinions—to pro-
vide a more simple, easy, and cheaper remedy
than is possible under the present system ; while
at the same time there would be nothing to en-
courage separations on trivial or inadequate
grounds, but that the parties, from knowing the
impossibility of forming other connexions, might
be induced to display mutual forbearance and even
forgiveness towards one another. This latter
feeling, laudable as it unquestionably is, appears
to have been carried to a very great extent—so
much so, indeed, as to render the measure wholly
inadequate to the exigencies of the case, and to
render relief impossible in ninety-nine instances
out of one hundred where it might safely be
granted, where, indeed, the aggrieved parties
should be entitled to demand it ex debito justitice.
Indeed, although unquestionably a step in the
right direction, it is only valuable as the intro-
duction of the sharp end of the wedge, by means
whereof more useful results may be anticipated at
some future time.

tinder the New Bill, the divorce, a vinculo
matrimonii, is in accordance with the recommenda-
tion of the Commissioners to be granted solely for
adultery, and except in cases of extreme atrocity
—such as bigamy or incest—on the application
of the husband only. Oa the first point the
problem is, indeed, one of great difficulty, in
which the arguments on- either side are so nicely
balanced that it is hard to arrive at a

satisfactory conclusion. That there may
be cases of extreme cruelty and oppression
such as would prevent the possibility of the in-
jured party again living with the aggressor, is
certain. . The law has not been accustomed to
look on any injury short of adultery as being
irreparable. Nor has it, we regret to say, treated
females at all fairly or equitably in matrimonial
matters. The Divine precept that a man should
not put away his wife and marry another, save
for fornication only, has unquestionably great
weight ; and if the separation from bed and
leard, with full protection to the injured party
irolll any acts or demands on account of the
other, could be cheaply obtained, it is perhaps
lot.:woeuvgerht
gtroeabte stahnectiino
jnuerdy.
no Butreltiheef
rule that
tahsaftar
shall be given to the fernale, appeals more ques-
tionable. Surely a woman has feelings as well as
a man. Surely when all her prospects in life are
blasted—when her outraged affections forbid
1 her resuming her former, relationship with
the man who has violated his nuptial vow—she
should not be condemned to.a solitary and miser-
able existence. As it is, the rules adopted are
partial and one-sided, and, unfortunately, no
effort is made to render them more just and equi-
table. Granted that there may be greater reason
that the man may not have
theto
suspectnrepugnance to the offence for which alone
relief
s acan
becollusion,a as the woman,s and that its
ff o rded

future consequoces would not fall so heavily on

from the multitude of cares devolving
upon him in consequence, there might have
been every excuse for occasional remissness in one
or other of the twin departments. As Colonial
Secretary of State, the virtual Minister of War
during a time of war might, in the event of any
blundering or forgetfulness in regard to the carry-
ing out of our bellicose operations, have found in
the forty gigantic and scattered colonies of Eng-
land ample and indeed all-sufficient extenuation.
Not so can it be any longer with his Grace the Duke
of NEWCASTLE. He is no longer the custodian of the
destinies of our remote and enormous possessions.
His responsibilities may be reduced in number,
but they are, at the same time, wonderfully en-
larged in importance. To him the country will
now look for the prosecution of the war against
Russia in a manner and upon a scale befitting the
might of the empire and the grandeur of the cause
upon the vindication of which England and France
have together adventured. That cause, grander
even than the defence of the tranquillity of Chris-
tendom—the repulse of the Barbarism threatening
the destruction of Civilisation—the punishment of
a blasphemous schism for its many heinous out-
rages upon the Divine glory arid ineffable benefi-
cence of Christianity.

The Poles saved Europe in a former age from
an overwhelming incursion of the infidel hordes
of Asia. As her recompense for this sublime
triumph over the enemies of Christendom, Poland
was dismembered. Her very name as a nation was
swept from the map of that very Europe which
her hero-sons had defended under the walls of
Vienna. Can we believe that a similar fate is
reserved for Turkey—that Turkey is to be dis-
membered and destroyed in return for fight-
ing so long and so gallantly against the
enormous armies sent forth by the Rus-
sian AUTOCRAT for the conquest of Christen-
dom and the destruction of Civilisation. it is
incredible, utterly incredible, notwithstanding the
mutterings so frequently heard of late as to the i