The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-28 00:00:00

MINORITY-AYES, 70.

Aeland, Sir T. D. Du Pre, C. G. Masterman, John
Ansley, T. C. Farnham, E. B. Meux, Sir H.
Ashley, Lord Farrel', James Miles, P. W. S.
Bailey, Joseph YilMer, Sir E., , Miles, W.
Bailey, Joseph, jun. Forbes, William Napier, Joseph
Baillie, H. J. .Fuller, A. E. O'Brien, Sir Lucius
Beresford, William Granby, Marquis of Feel, Sir Robert
Boldero, H. G. Preenall, Gilbert Plowden, W. H.
Bourke, R. S. Greene, Thomas Pugh, David
Bowles, Admiral Grogan, Edward Reid, Colonel - •

Brack:ey, Vise • unt Mall, Colonel Sam:furs, George
ilramston, T. W. Harris, Captain ' Seymer, Henry Ker
Buller, Sir J. Y. Heneage, G. H. W. Sidney, Alderman
Buxton, Sir E. Herbert, Sydney Stanley, Edward
Campbell, W. F. Herries, J. C. . Taylor, r. E.
Carew, W. P. Hildyar I B. C. Tyrrell, Sir J.

_ .
Chandos, Marquis Hogg, Sir J. W.
Chaplin, W. J. Hope, Sir J.
Clements, Charles • Hope, H. T.
Clive, Henry B. Hughes, W. B.
Cochrane, A. Lewis, Sir 'l'.
Cocks, T. 5. Lincoln, Earl of TELLERS.
Cubitt, William Lopes, Sir Ralph Gladstone, W. E.
Dodd, George Mahon, Viscount Goulburn, Henry
Duncuft, John Mangles, R. D.

Waddington, 11. S.
Willoughby, Sir 11.
Wortley, S.
Young, Sir John

MAJORITY-NOES, 89.
Anderson, Arthur Ilardeastle, J. A. Pilkington, James
Bass, M. T. Harris, Richard Pinney, William
Berkeley, C. L. G. Hastie, Archibald Roche, E. It.
Birch, Sir T. llawes, B. Romilly, Sir John
Bright, John Henry, Alexander Russell, F. C.
Brotherton, J. Ileyworth, Lawrence Rutherfurd, A.
Brown, W. 'Lindley Charles Salwey, Colonel
Cavendish, C. C. Hodges, T. L. Scully, Francis
Cavendish, W. G. Howard, E. G. Shafto, R. D.
Cobden, It. lloward, I'. 11. , Sheridan, R. B.
Cowan, Charles Hume, J. Smith, It. V.
Crawford, W. S. Ilumphery, Ald. • Smith, M. Tucker
Davie, Sir Henry Jervis, Sir John Somerville, Sir IV.
. . _

DrummOnd. Henry Kershaw, James ,
Strickland, Sir G.
11111WATI, Vlacormt Leonard. T. D. Stuart, Lord D.
Duncan, George Locke, Joseph Tnickll4,4:ie. Ralph
Duncombe, A. Lushington, C. Thompson, Colonel
Dandas, Admiral M'Gregor, John Thompson, George
Ellis, John ' Maitland, Thomas Thornely, Thomas
Evans, Sir De Lacy Man hail, J. G. Tuthell, Heiary •
Ewart, William Matheson, Colonel Wall, C. B.
Fagan, William Moffatt, George Wawn, J. T.
Fordyce, A. 1). Morgan, H. K. Wil!cox, Brodie
Forster, Matthew Morris, David Williams, John
Fortescue, Chichester Mostru, E. M. L. Wilson, Matthew
Fox, R. M. Mowatt, Francis Wyld, James
Gibson, T. M. • O'Connor, Feargus Wyvill, Marmaduke
Glyn, G. C. O'Flaherty, Anthony
Greene, John Ogle, S. C. TELLERS.
Grenfell, C. Pascoe Pattison, James Osborne, Ralph
Grey, Ralph W. Peudarves, E. W. Clay, Sir W.

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE
METROPOLITAN REFORM ASSOCIATION.

Sir,—On Monday the 26th the Member for the West
Riding brought on his amendment for the reduction of
the naval and military expenditure to the scale of 1835.
The mover introduced it in an able address, and was
supported by almost every Member known to give at-
tention to such subjects, with the exception of those
whom the custom of the House does not allow to speak
on general questions. The replies of the Government were
neither brilliant nor effective. Every successive occasion
for the increase of the military force since 1835 was paraded
in order, but nothing was ever said of reduction when
the occasion ceased. So that the whole might have re-
minded the audience of " Boa's" description of the house
where people were eternally going up stairs, and never
coming down again. Some very small items also were
brought forward to swell the defence ; as for instance
the necessity of providing the army with percussion
muskets, the fact being that the reduction of one bat-
talion would find the army with percussion muskets for
ever and for ever. The amendment was finally supported
by eighty Members, tellers included; showing the same
strength as on former occasions on .similar questions,
allowance being made for a few who might be expected
to find the balance turned by the desirableness of sup-
porting the Government.
On Tuesday the most interesting of the debates
was on the motion for the second reading of the White-
chapel Tithes and Easter Offerings Bill; the object of
which, as stated in the printed paper put into the hands
of Members by the promoters of the Bill, is to " coat,
mute a litigious mode of payment to one free from such
objections," by paying the Rector out of the Poor Rates.
I wonder whether any Irish landlords could be found
agreeing to an exchange of similar effect, by chang-
ing their rents into a charge upon the Poor Rates or
the Consolidated Fund. Many Members actively sup
ported the resistance to the Bill; though the number
was reduced by the arbitrary rule as betore, which pro
bibits certain Members frima speaking upon public busi-
ness. It is hard upon a MeMber, who has.grobably been
urged by his supporters, on a particular-question, and
who it may be is in hot water with his constituency as a
man who cannot or will not support the objects in which
theyfeel interested, to find him self utterly extinguishedfrom
such a cause. But there is scarcely an alternative for a
Representative not holding certain advantages either of
office or of constituency, between being one of the gra-
duated bores of the House, and finding himself barred as
described.

I am, Sir, your oiedient servant,
AN OLD IL.,FORMER.

London, Feb. 27, 1849.

MARRIAGE WITH THE SISTER

OF A DECEASED WIFE

Since 1835, when Lord Lindhuratl; Bill passed into
law, prohibiting marriage with the sister of a deceased
wife, and rendering those marriages valid which had
been previously contracted, considerable discussion has
taken place on the subject, and the utmost uneasiness
been felt among parties who have formed, unions in
violation of the law. Mr. Stuart Wortley, it will be
seen, by referring to the proceedings in the House of
Commons on Thursday night, brought in a Bill to amend
and alter the Act of 5 and 6 Wm. IV., cap. 54, his main
object being to legalize marriages of this description.
The religious difficulty principally rests upon the 18th
verse of the 18th chapter of Leviticus--" Neither shalt
thou take a wife to her sister to vex her, &c, besides the
other, in her lifetime." The opponents of the existing
law contend that this verse must be interpreted with
peculiar reference to the prevalence of polygamy among
the Jews, and the jealousies between Leah and Rachel.
All it meant to prohibit, therefore, they contend, was
the taking of two sisters to rife at the same time. The
Chief Rabbi, in a communication addressed to the Secre
tary of the Commission, states distinctly that the mar-
riages in question are held lawful amongst his people;
that they very frequently occur, and (so far as his ex-
perience extends) almost invariably turn out well. The
Rev. Dr. Wiseman, Pro-Vicar Apostolic of the London
District, says—" Such marriages are disapproved of in
the Mosaic law, but are not, on that account, contrary to
the Christian law." The Commissioners, in their Report
on the subject, say—" We think that very many of the
clergy do not consider such marriages to be prohibited
by the laws of God." In Scotland, the feeling of the
clergy is decidedly against such marriages; whilst the
Dissenters do not appear to entertain the opinion that
they arc interdicted by Holy Writ. Dr. Pusey says,
that the respectable party in the Church, who partake of
his views in mutters ecclesiastical, hold such marriages
decidedly unholy. A limited nod imperfect inquiry, in-
stituted by private persons at their own cost, has brought
to light no fewer than 1,364 marriages within the pro-