The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-10 00:00:00

1310ERIAL P titLIAMEN r.

HOUSE OF LORDS, July 9.

Their Lords+;ip3 mer, at Fly,: o'etock.
LA.(I CANIPiiELL mov,d the third reading of the
Sheriffs of Wes!rilirdind

The Bill was rea i a third time and passed.
DRAINAGE OF LANDS BILL.

This Bill, on the mltion of the Earl of CARLISLE,
passed through Committee.
PETITIONS.

Several petitions were presented by various parties,
praying to be hard by counsel azainst the Port of
Newcastle .upon-Tyne Improvem,nt Bill.
Lord BEAUNION r presented a petition from the
minist-r and wardens of a Roman Catholic Chapel,
complaining. of the too tie tr approach of a railway to
the weir. .inflow of their chapel.
Lord REDESDA LE presented a petition from the in-
ventors of a smoke consuming apparatus, praying for its
adop•ion by the Governmenr.
Lord WEIA.RNCLIFFE pr,sented petitions against
the granting of licences to beer-lionoes; al,o from certain
miners in the county of Northumberland, pr4ying that
some of their members might be outtnitted before the
Committee on the Ventilation of Min9i.
PRISON DI >CIPLINE._

Lord BROUG 11A Ai, in explanation of what ho had
urged the other night on the subject of the clas,ificmtion
of prisoners, impressed upon their L.)rdships the ne-
cessity of shortening the period of confinement which
took place of prisoners before trial, and suggested the
propriety ty enlarging the jurisdiction of the County
Courts tor the purpo4e.
ASSAULTS (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bil, was read a third iine ani
MUTINY AND DESERTION (INDIA) BILL.
This Bill passed through Committee.
RETURNS

The Marqui; of LANSDOWNE presented the re-
turns of toe 1,-)an Commissioners of IlAand, and several
other returns by command of her Mik.mty.
EAnTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY.

Lord MON T EAGLE presented a petition from several
shareholders in the EAstern Counti,s Railway. eons,
pl,ttning of having been led astray by certain misrepre-
sentations to consent to an •ana4lganLition with another
c mipany, and preying that the Bill for that umalgatna •
don might not pass until the Bill authorising a Govern-
me ;t audit of ra,tvu,y acc..unts should have bec.ime law.
The Bi'ls on the table were forwarded a stage, and
their Lordships adj,wthtd.

HOUSE OF tAI d MONS, July 9.
MARRIAGE (SCO PLANT)) BILL.
The LORD ADVOCATE (in continuation from our
Afternoon E talon of yesterdav) said—He had now to be-
seech the atten ion of Hon. Members, and particularly
Scotch Members, while he stared the objects of the Mar-
riage Bill. In the first place, one of its objects was to intro,
duce certainty, and remove great sources of uncertainty,
with respectei the contraction of marriages—to leave it no
longer a metter of d tubt and difficulty, to be ascertained
by a sitting investigation, and a long and most
unsatisfactory inquiry, whether parties have or have not
eeetraeted the state of marriage. Tee first object then,
was to remove uncertainty with respect to the institatien
of marriage. and to introduce regulations to secure a
better performance of the ceremony. Tae second object
was to insure, as far as possible, publicity to the contract
of marriage, and to put an end to a state of law which
he could not help thinking was a disgrace to a civilized
country, as it not only admitted but encouraged the con-
traction of clandestine and concealed tnarriages.—(llear,
he r.) The third object of the Bill was to s- cure a
reasonable intimation of the intention of parties to
marry, so as to prevent hasty and ill-assorted unions, by
giving the friends of the parties some notice of the in-
tention, and thus making them interfere to pre-
vent or sanction the marriage, time being al-
lowed to them for the parpose.—(Cries of " Hear.")
There was also another point to which he wished to ad-
vert, viz., that a person belonging to any of the dissent-
ing bodies in Scotland could not be married by a dissent-
ing clergyman without a proclamation of the banns
being first made in the Established Church. This, he
considered, was a very great grievance to all the
parties concerned. The present law of Scotland made
marriage a matter of civil contract; it was constituted
simply by consent, and it was not even required that
intercourse should follow the consent of the parties. To
ascertain, therefore, the validity of marriage, it was
necessary in many cases to spell it out by inference and
conjecture, which, of course, gave rise to much
difficulty, and frequently to litigation. Was that a state
of law which ought to be allowed to exist? It was said
that the presnt law was for the protection of females,
but in how meny cases had it happened that a written
promise of marri ge had been given to the woman, and had
afterwardsteen destroyed bt her seducer? In how teeny
other cases had it happened that the woman had received
the most direct promise of marriage, bad then sum ndered
her person, and on being deserted had no other evidence
to appeal to than the oath of her seducer? He had no
hesitation in saying, as the resultof long professional expe-
rience thet the present law, instead of being a protection
to females, was a snare for entrapping them.—(Hear,
hear.) He would now state how he wished the Bill,
which he had introduced, to operate. In the first place,
he intended to make all marriages good which were
celebrated by a clergyman ; he would Lave the
taw as regarded such marriages where he found it, with
this exception, that where there was no proclamation or
the banns, the parties should fill up a certificate giving
notice to the registrar of their intention to marry. With
respect to other marriages—marriages of an irregular na-
ture which were constituted by former subsequent inter-
course or cohebeation,reputation, or private writings—he
proposed, Li order to ensure publicity, that no marriage
should be valid unless the c*.nsent was given befot e the
registrar, and was duly registered by him. This
would prevent all dispute as to the validity
of the marriage, and would also prevent all
clandestine proceedings. He also proposed that
where the parties refused to have their banns
proclaimed, that they should intimate their intention to
marry to the registrar, who was bound to
publish it in the most effectual manner. The Hon.
Gentleman opposite maintained that he had done
nothing. because he had only fixed a penalty of 2001.
He wished to remind the Honourable Gentleman,
that in &aline with a clergyman he was dealing with
a public officer, and he could not deal with
him in any other manner. In such a case, too, the
penalty would be followed probably by deprivation
of offiee. He could not carry the punishment fur-
ther, except by making the marriages void, and
that would lead to worse consequences, and would
punish the wrong parties. The uncertainty of the
law in Scotland with respect to marriage was the great
evil which called for this redress. With respect to con-
sequence-t, he referred the House to the case of a gen-
tleman in Scotland possessed of extensive landed pro-
perty there, who had married a lady from England, and
after the union had subsisted a year or two a claim was
brought against him by a woman in Scotland of a pre-
vious marriage, which claim depended upon writings, in
which she affirmed a promise of marriage was given. These
were held to be proved, and the English marriage was
declared void, and the lady obliged to return home in
the character of an unmarried woman after she had for
some time sustained the character and borne the honours
of a married woman. Was such a state of things to
be permitted any longer? Was such a state of law
to be approved which allows such abuses to prevail?
this cave of itself alone was sufficient to ask that H
to interfere and put down such a state of law. He wished
to mak, a few observations with respect to the opposition
made to this Bill. Members of the Church of Scotland
had sometimes said to him "you are making marriage
too easy by allowing marriage by registration." Why
what better way was there than thus to insure publicity ?
Others, almost in the same breath, charged him with
making marriage too difficult, by preventing marriage
by writings and sub,equeet intercourse, or by premise,
Again, he was charged with giving legal couuteuanc-
for the first time to irregular marriages.- With regard
to the objections made by the Church of Scotland, it Was
only necessary to look at the ate-es of things in Scotland
now; the only penalty now was for a clergyman marrying
a couple without obtaining evidence of a proper pro-
clamation but have nothing to do with the Chureh:
marry by writing, however dubious and enigmatical—
merry by promise, however alight, and you were
perfectly safe. If a clergyman were intro
(limed into the affair, and if he did not obtain
evidence of a proclamation, which he had already ahowri
to be a perfect farce, that instant the law interposed and
the parties were subject to a penalty. What an ab•
surdi y was this. Could there be conceived any more
prep tsterous state of the law than this? He could find
no force in the objection of the Church of Scotland
to any law which proposed such a state of things.
If the Church of Scotland did say that they had a lieu
to interfere in this matter, they were making greater
eleirns than the Chinch of Rome had dune at the
Council of Trent. With respect to the petitions which
he.! been brought against these Bills, they numbered 337;
and 225 were presented from the Church ; and these
were got up in an t xtraordinary manner. There was a
petition from the teener 1 Assembly, and a petition
from the Commission of the General Assembly, which
was about the same thing. In the same manner there
were petitions from the synod. presbytery and particu-
lar individuals in Aberdeen, and this was the way all
threttehout. Out of 1,000 perishes in Scotland, not above
130 had petitions d, and all the petitions presented
were not signed by more than 7.000 persons. He
could not consider that these p-ti.iona were an ex-
positign of the opinion of Scotland. He asked for these
Bills, first, on the ground of certainty to the
contracting of marriages in Scotland, which they
hid not at prea-nt, and, secondly, to give pub-
licity to marriage, which was highly desirable.
The Committee dui not object to listening to the opi-
nions of laeyers given before the Committee; but they
o*.ct,ll to some ilfetrozsu clergymen of the Estab-
lished Church, and a provost from each city in Scot-
land, being in the first piece examined before the Com-
mittee. The Hon. and Learned Member concluded by
saying he wonli oppose the amendment.
Mr. 111• NEILL supported the amendment. Bt fore he
could consent to any alteration in the law, he demanded
some exposition of the great injury that had resulted
from its past operation. He hae co objection to gem,
into a Cornolitee of incoiry on the di<graceful mode
which obetined on the borders of Seorland of sekm
niaine marriages. That practice was a great grie=v-
ance to the lower order,: of the people of Scotiand,
and he would rejoice to see a measure brought
to remedy anti reineve that abuse; .ucti a upaaiiire
would not only (ewe a greet evil to which the lower
clews were now subject, without aleedging their enjoy.
ruenta, b,it w mid etr-ct that objet S,‘ ithout werkiee
my evil to the higher and reiddle cl saes.
held that a in trriige solemnly entered into by
the principals in the presence or the members
of their which we.; the present moths
ot' celebrating tearriag,e in Setolen-1, an l where the par
ties afterwards fora long series of ye-us lived in the
opea relstionship of man and wire. was a much mote
impress* proof of the relationship of feartiage thsu

any mere registration 0' the fact, which was one of the
ohj.-cte proposed by the present Bill. The ancient
practice of seletnnizing marriages in Scotland
was one which had a counterpart in every
Iteeton.in the world, and its propriety and legality had
been re cognised by the ecclesiastical courts in England
in the person of a men so learned and of so high a re -
putation as Dr. Luanington. It had been given in evi-
dence before the Committee over and ote2r again that the
people of Secalend were a virtuous people. Why, then,
was the House to be told by the advocates of the pre-
sent Bill that the present system of marriage led to vice
and immorality ? He hoped the people of Scotland were
to be considered a civilized people. He knew they
were a virtuous people, and one who respected the Laws.
In the name of justice and the people of outland, he
protested against this BM, since they had given them no
Opportunity of stating their objections to it. The author
of the Bill admit,ed that the people of Scotland were
most virtuous, yet the Bill was introduced un the ground
that it VIN 3 intended to pet a stop to ion
morality. The laws of • England wiLle respect
to ineerrhge did not prevent that in England
which it wets stated it was the object of the Bill to ob-
viate in Scotland. In the first place, nearly all the
counties of Seetland had petitioned against this Bill.
Mr. F. MAULE—The petitions also were against the
Registration l 3 11.—(Oppwition cheers.)
Mr. M'NEILL said it the Marriage Bill passed, the
Ree-,istraien Bill would be reudered necessary.
'Phis showed how much both of these Bills were dis-
liked. An immense number of the townseiouneile had
voted againrt it, as also a vast number of parochial
hoards, who might be said to represent the poor; also of
the General Assembly, and of the borough representa-
tives. Surely these persons and the others who had pe-
titioned a..ainst the measure could not be looked upon as
not expressing the int, resla of the people of Scotland. It
was said that the number o: peter loners was small. Why
it must be borne in mind that many of them were signed
by the chairmen of the meetings from which they had ema-
nated. Tats all had been before the House thre, years,
but each year it had been rejected ; and the patient
having refused for three years to take the medicine pro-
pounded to him, the Noble Lord was about to thrust
it down his throat. (Loud laughter.) The people
of Scotland "ire a loyal, a peaceable, and a
constitutional peoplo. Tnis was conced dou al hands.
Therefore they thould nut press a measure upon titetn
which was most objecionable to the whole mass of the
people. It they were about to start a new colony, he
did not say that the law of Scotland wits respect to
marriage was one that he should reel disposed to apply
to it; oat, having stood so lung, and worked so well, he
saw no reason why it should be altered against the wish
of the entire people.---(Orteers.)
Mr. F. MAULE reierred to the proceedings in the
Committee on the Bill, and drew attention to the fact
that the Hon. and Leorned Gentlemen who had just re-
sumed his seat declined to give evi fence on the suhjete:
before them. It was the wore to be regretted that he
bad not placed his opinions on record, since
he had now e-xptessed them so strongly. •
would ask whether a great improvement would
not be made in the cotolition of the people
by marriages being made public iestead of being,
carried on clandestinely. The amendment moved
by his Right Honourable Frieud the Lord Ad.
vocate it carried, would make the law clear on
the subject of marriage in Ireland. He believed that
the voice of tbo people of Scotland was nut represented
by the petitions that had been presented against
this Bill. The petitions had emanated from no
public body, but from the Commissioners of
Supply for Countit s. He believed it was
nut the Marriage all, but the R.gistration Bill, with
which the Marriage Bill Has connected, that had caused
the opposition of the Commi-sioners of Supply to the
measure.—(Hear.) The city of Glasgow had approved
of the Bill, and also the Registration Bill and se
had many of the principal cities and towns of Scotland.
The grounds on which he gave his support to the mea-
sure were not because he wi-hed to force upon the
people tit Scotland a measure to which they were
opposed. lie did not wish to cram down the
throats of the people of Scotland a me sure antagonistic
to their peace, but the grounds on which he supported
the measure were that it would place the marriage law
of Scotland on a more sound betas, and would promote
the morality and happiness of the people of Scetland.
Mr. HU%IE thought all the witnesses, and the state-.
ments of the Noble and Learned Lord, the late Loris
Advocate of Scotland, had demonstrated every face
in support of the present measure. They might
well talk of the manlier in which Scotland was used
in that House. Why, this was the only four hours
during the present session that had been devoted to the
affairs of Scotland.—(llear, hear.) It his Right.
Honourable Friend the Lord Advocate introduced
a measure to abolish Gretna-green marriages it,
Scotland he would • support him.—(Hear, hear.)
But when he brought forward a measure
that was to put an end to a great pile
ciple in Scotland, and when he found that the
Government were persevering against the wishes of a
majority of the people of Scotland, be could not but bi-
mega the course that had been pursued. H.
thought it a perfect mockery, in every
point of view, to see the way in which the.
people of Scotland had been treated in that Habe.
(Hear, hear.) He &oiled that the institution of marriage
in Scotland was one worthy only of a semi-burearou,
nature. He thought the time was coming when the)
should pass a resolution. and ho hoped Scotch Member,.
would be the first to do so, that when it was propua.-o
to proceed with Scotch affairs after midnight.
that a motion should be made to adjourn the
House—(Hear)—and that such motion should be
persevered in till the affairs of Scotland were proper])
considered. The Noble and Learned Lord (the Lor..
Adrocaie) had said that this Bill had come dawn to the
House for three ) ears. He trusted it would come down
tor thirty before the House would tolerate such a
measure.—(Hear, hear, and cries of " Divide.") On
these grounds he hoped the 8.11 would be rejected, anti
that in future Government would see the necessity of
not taking up the time of the House with such measures
as these.

The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment
... 68
Against it ...
... 73
Majority against it ... —5

On our return to the gallery we found
Mr. GLADS TONE, observing that, although he was
not a Scotch Member he was so far connected with Scot-
land as to have the means of judging the state of pubic
reeling there on this Bill, and he trusted it would not be
persevered in this session.—(Hear, hear.) The Parlia-
mentary case of the Learned Lurd—he did not mean the
merits of the case—was against him, and as he
and the Committee over which he had presided had ad-
mitted that further evidence ought to be tak. n on the
subject, he hoped the time of the House would not be
wasted any longer, but that the Bill would be postponed
till next session.—(Hear.)
Lord J. ItUoSELL did not think the time of the
House had been wasted, as this debate bad afibrded the
Right Hon. and Learned Member opposite, the late
Lord Advocate, an opportunity of stating his views upon
the Bill, which he certainly had done with great ability.
—(Bear.) All, therefore, that he could now do, tater
hearing this debate, was to ask the House to yam
a day, or fix a certoin period when they would read tm
Bill a third time.— (Hear, hear.) If the House had uo
obj•cdon he would fix it for Thursday, when he would
be prepared to state distinctly whet course Governmen:
intended to puriui. with regard to tle Bill.—(Hear.)
Mr. LOCK!! ART appiehended that that question
was still before the House.
Mr. F. MACKENZIE said the motion before the
House was the main question as to whether the third
reading should be taken on Monday or not.
Mr. GLADSTONE suggested that they had better,
under those circuinstui.ces, adjourn the debate till
Thursday.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he had no objection to that
course, ar.d moved it accordingly.
Mr. HUNIE coped the Registration Bill would be con-
sidered at the same time.

Mr. BOUVERIE, on the other hand, trusted it woulfi
not, for whilig ha and othrs were oppoied to the Aar
riagi., they had no objection to the R. gioration Bill, but.
on . he colitrar), considered it an Excellent measure, no.-
% ittrstanding what had been said by an Honourable
Baronet opposite, that without the Marriage Bill th.
Registration Bill NOlll4 be a d• sd letter.—(Hear, hear.)
The House then adjou ns.4l till six o'clock.

The House resurrwd ek.
LANDLORD AND 'TENANT BILL.

Mr. FAGAN presented a petition from York prayint,
fur an extension of tha Landlord and Tenant Bill.
HARBOURS OF REFUGE.

Mr. HUME gave notice that be should to-morrow
mfove fir returns of the expenses of the harbours o'
refuge, including those which had already been paid and
th sae
alrch had bc.en incurred.

Mr. LABOUCHERE gave notice that, at the
inorninw sitting on Thursday, he should move
f-r leave to bring in two Bills for the
beneficial regulation of the mercantile marine.
One was intend -d toregi.late the present custom of pilo;-,
age, t,) which he exp.cted there would be no opposition;
and the other, which had regard more to the positions or
the seamen, if there should be any opposition to it, he did
not intend to proceed with it during the present session,

IN 'CR A MURAL INTERMENTS.
Mr. MACKINNON wished to ask the
Noble Lore
rho mber tor Bath (Lord A,4h:ey),aa a member °lib.:
Health of T..wns Cemmission, whether the report was
correct, that, in the metropolis and other, large towns
;he cholera, in poor dcsricts, has generally attacked
those persons whose habitations were in the vicinity os
graveyards?

• - -
Lor 1 ASHLEY said the communications which had
been receird from the d,ft: run parts ut the country did
..nt state whether or not the deaths from cholera
had tam place in the vicinity of graveyards
There could be no doubt, however, that interments
in towns did exercise a very dangerous influence upott
the health of the inhAbitants.—(Hear, hear.) Dr.
S. Smith, in a tter to ;he Bo ,rd of Health, with rt fel.-
. nee to the c,;ses or cholera which had occurred to, Bris
tol, stated that the disease hd hroken out in a low.
damp. and overcrowded npighbourhood, in which here
were burial grounds where the most violent outrages
were committed.