The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-23 00:00:00

handy member of the Commission could put his
o the entire report who was not prepared for an
alteration of the law, and probably a relaxation.
Mr. HENLEY had misunderstood the Honourable
and Learned Gentlemen. There was an extraordinary
omission in the evidence. Her Majesty's Commissioners
were bound to treat the most difficult part of the sub-
ject. But they had not touched on what would be the
eotdition of the clergy of the Church of England if this
lawMr-
were relaxed. That question was touched on by
alr. Paterson, by one of the Irish clergy, and by Arch-
deacon Sinclair. The statement of the clergyman from
Ireland was to the effect that many of the clergy would not
celebrate such marriages; Archdeacon Sinclair expressed
the hope that they would not be complied to celebrate
them ; and Mr. Paterson thought the clergy felt con-
strained by the force of the canon law. He spoke from
memory ; but in what position were they going to place
the clergy by this Bill ? "Would the Noble Lord sum-
mon.., Convocation together, to relieve them from the
Obligations of the canon law ? The Right Hon. and
Learned Gentleman had attempted to throw discredit on
the canons ; but while he admitted that they had been
sanctioned by Cranmer and Parker, he omitted to state
that they had in 1603 been ratified by the Convocation
and confirmed by the Crown. It was very difficult to
lay how the clergy were to be released from the obliga-
tions of those canons. He should not at present vote on
the general merits of the question. If ever there was
this was
artistically got up—he used the word advisedly—
is was the case ; and the report partook wholly of that
character. Any person reading, to copy the Right
Hon. and Learned Gentleman's language, one of the
earliest paragraphs of the report, would believe that the
Pope had to do with the earliest ages of Christianity;
nor did the report advert to the fact that the Eastern
Church had throughout rejected those marriages,
and without dispensation. The report was so carafully
drawn that any one reading it would come to the con-
clusion that those marriages had been dispensed from
the beginning. He objected on social as well as other
grounds to the proposed measure. The report described
the proposed alteration as contrary to the sense only of
the clergy in Scotland, though it was stated in the evi-
dence that the same feeling extended to the whole people
of Scotland. The report was not a fair exponent of the
evidence. In Ireland these marriages were regarded
with abhorrence. Were they, for the sake of a small
minority, who had gone deliberately, and with their
eyes open against the laws of the Church and country.
to take- a step which would confessedly shock the feel-
ings of the community, and place the clergy in such a
position as that they should either be obliged to act
against their consciences, or that they should be left
under an anomalous state of the law to do or not to do
what he believed a great majority of the people thought
contrary to the law of man and of God ?
Sir G. GREY, having intimated to the Right Hon.
and Learned Gentleman (Mr. S. Wortley) that no op-
Position would be offered to bringing in the Bill, did
not intend at that stage to make any observa-
tions. Had there been opposition to the introduction of
the Bill, he should have proposed to state the reasons
why in his individual capacity he was prepared to give
h his support in so far as it related to marriages with a
,deceased wife's sister, and why he should approve of
laying on the table of the House a measure for carrying
out an object which, not in terms but in substance, had
been declared by a Royal Commission to be one that
required legislation. If the result of that consideration
which Hon. Gentlemen would have an opportunity of
'iving to the Bill should be any opposition to its further
Progress, he should then certainly assign the reasons
which would lead him to vote for the second read-
41g•—(Hear, hear,) He would not say he would go
3 further than the Right Honourable and Learned
Gentleman proposed; but he wished to guard himself
against being supposed to coincide entirely either in the
extent to which the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman
carried his views, or to the limitations he approved. On
thatquestion he (Sir G. Grey) wished to be left free in
forming his judgment till the second reading. Having
read the report of the Commission and examined the
ridence he did not concur in the reproach thrown on
the
Commissioners, or in the remarks of a depreciating
nature with respect to the evidence they had collected.
They
_ had collected a vast nnmber of facts bearing upon
What to him had always been a paramount consideration,
araelY, the practical effect of the existing law for the best
interests of society.—(Hear, hear.) The Hun. Member
for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) said it was the opinion of
interested parties that was given in the evidence, and
that It ought therefore to be disregarded. Interested
Parties were alone capable of giving that information
hich the Commission was appointed to collect. If all
the evidence of interested parties, or of parties who were
!liffering from the operation of the present law, had
lien set aside, the Commissioners would not have ful-
-I.ned their duty. With respect to the practice of the an-
tent church, the prohibitions were so extensive, absurd,
and unnatural, that a dispensing power bad been intro-
duced which had been exercised for many centuries in
the Roman Catholic Church; and, without falling back
law Pon that practice, it would be impossible to found any
d;of marriage upon the practice of the ancient church.
iffered was at present in a state of uncertainty. It
_ea,in
tnent of
England, from the law which prevailed with
;err" to those marriages over the greater part of the
of accomplishing its object. Certainly effecting that
to those marriages
in regard
Which had taken place before Lord Lyndhurst's Act, it
Was impossible to deny that the effect of that Act was,
Teence it passed, to render those marriages indissoluble.
could not imagine how any one who thought those
marriages contrary to the Divine law should have con-
curred in that Act. That Act set at rest questions which
nated uneasiness in families by substantially confirm-
s such marriages of this description as had previously
been contracted; but prospectively he was afraid as
much uncertainty was produced by the existing state of
the law. On these grounds he thought the House ought
to allow the Bid to be brought in. It would be a matter
for consideration wilt ther the measure would accomplish
the object it proposed to gain, but, for one, he heartily
assented to its introduction.
Mr. NAPIER should give the Bill his most deter-
mined opposition. They had the mind of the Church of
exeigland, the Church of Ireland, and the Church of
ocotland, and the concurrent Christian testimony of cen-
turies that those marriages were fOrbidden by the law
of God. If they had to make a choce—were they to
tilltoop in deference to the animal passions of those who
ad broken the law, or were they to reverence the long-
cherished feelings of the great majority of the people?
There was a religious basis for the present law, and
there were very intelligible reasons for its existence,
the freedom of intercourse which the degrees of affinity
;nd eoesauguanity allowed requiring to be guarded by
trarY hallowed teelings. The whole principle on which
e jaw of marriage rested would be endangered.
mtr. PLUMPTRE felt the subject to be not unattended
w•
difficulties. More serious inquiry had brought
:lm to a determination to oppose the Bill. The change
The
would introduce greater evils than now existed.
0 children of a deceased wife, whom the measure was
t0.0m...1'11Y intended to benefit, might suffer more than ever;
;,Jealousy and suspicion would be introduced into fa-
elies such as did not now exist.
the
WORTLEY complained of the attack to which
ed; Commissioners had been subjected by the Hon. and
for4r,rmed Member for Plymouth and the Hon. Member
rnk'XfOrd. Seeing who the Commissioners were, it was
th7,l4,ter of surprise that they should have been made
b•eeuieets of insinuation, if not of direct imputation.
reia'are was really no ground • for alleging that the Com-
rem loners had acted otherwise than impartially. It was
deneeeftmatter of complaint that the report and the eri-
,
else - did not sufficiently,show what was the opinion of the
enegY, of the Church of England with reference to this
ation; but that was not the fault of the Commissioners.
reeenilliahop who presided over the Commission cora-
Powe•eeated with , the clergy, and did everything in his
optuin' tO make them come forward and declare their
re -us; but they did not do so; and the fair infe-
nee to
the be drawn from that circumstance was, that
Th `rgY had not a strong feeling on the subject.
e e Honourable Member for Oxford thought the
etntnissioners had acted unfairly in stating in their
e report that-the clergy of Scotland objected to the pro-
posed alteration of the law, without adding that the
v°ople of that country also took the same view of the
111) . Ject; but in the very next paragraph of the report it
tits announced that the feeling of the people of the
thaited Kingdom was opposed to the change, and surely
he inhabitants of Scotland came under that category.
onwers ag somewhat ungenerous to charge the Commis-
thine I.uPon such grounds with being' guilty ofeeeeny:
her b" lel a suppression of the truth. The Hon. ea m_
alaPre
or
ss xfor next alleged that the Commissioners had
th aed the fact that there had been no dispensations
e Greek Church.
e,
to • e ereedNLEY—l said that the fact was not alluded
the'first paragraph of the report.
$r r' WORTLEY--But, if it was nut alluded to in the ,
Teval.agraph, it was in another, in these terms:—
hee"e Greek Church held such marriages to be inces-
lien's and unlawful, and not to be allowed by dispense-
jes-ee°r otherwise ."_(Hear, hear.) It really was un-
eth`::?.able• to charge a prelate of the Church, amongst
hikiesie, Upon such unsubstantial grounds, with lending
teed to a scheme for getting up a case.. Then_ it was
Nalhat the Commissioners examined interested parties.
ateee4ut 'that always the case under similar
.circum-
eeek, ? .Would not &Committee on the navigation-laws
itiee;l4o interested parties? Would not a Commission to
ttoi—trke into.thaEcelesiastical Courts do the same ? Did
taaiefa -Commissioners appointed to inquire into the?
Whe,„lPal corporations examine interested parties
soej,.would they get• information it, they did not do
. kis Wear, hear.) Why, it was asked, had the Coin-
1W I
Slo
LW() d "re confined their attention to marriages within
Were
.segrees? Because, upon inquiry, -they found there
" marriages in any other degree, and like prace
hand. ilmn they confined themselves to the matter in
tletn In conclusion, the Right Hon. and Learned Gen-
gnestieezPressed a hope that future discussions on this
ape :1 would be conducted apart' from.tiny feelings of
rat
tettes..
rte/4"ii was then given to bring in the Bill.
ING TIES • AGAINST CLERGYMEN SECED-
kr. Tee ROM THE CHURCH O F ENGLAND.
%e'er!, esOUvERIE, after presenting petitions from
tem 1 places praying for an amendment of the Tolera-
isieeh4et, proceeded to move the motion of which he had
0; notice, " That this House will resolve itself into
isMinittee to consider the Act 1 William and Mary,
'dew (e°tnenonly called the Toleration Act), with a
Rivin to its amendment, by extending its benefit, and
Chung exemption from all penalties to ministers of the
ter .em (tf &Wan 1 d • daring themselves to be dissen-
Yosusti,l3eYrom." wase not his intention to detain the
eikanieeeonylength upon the subject ; be would confine
and the to a brief statement of the present state of thelaw,
The,
eemode in which he proposed to alter and extend it.
religi:;lailn etion Act might be called the great charter of
f liberty in this country, and was the gradual re-
Rinoa convictionwitirera that, instead of persecution for reli-
bilit
taieo4o,fl.ai?e btge a t inminli a p
dt eeces being duty, no penalties or civil disa-
nn
.r,iizShouldall ehl imposed on such grounds. From the
e
soufp Cr
eimi a
ar
el eys,g
alla ewhoins tookagainst
tthe