The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-20 00:00:00

The Governor of that colony had at his disposal patro-
nage to the extent of no less than 35,0001. a-year.
The Civil Service consisted of the following offices:—A
Governor at 5,0001. a year, a Chief Justice at 2,5001., two
pusine Judges at 1,500/. each, the Governor's secretary
1,5001., his assistant 600/., the Attorney- Generall,lool.,
the High Sheriff 1,2201., the other Under Sheriffs
at 7001. each, and six stipendiary Magistrates
70001., making the total cost of the Go-
vernment amount 39,000., per annum.
When the Court of Guiana met, they proposed that
there should be a redution of the expenditure of the co-
lony, but the Governor refused his sanction to the pro-
posal, upon which an altercation took place, and
the Court refused to grant the supplies. The
Governor, however, thought fit to change his
former resolution, end consent to the reduction.
but a dispatch from the Colonial-office deprecated the
measure, and refused to give his consent to a reduc-
tion of taxes. Now, what did that House suppose was
the chief tax in Guiana, why it was a tax upon corn;
and yet, although the Minister was as staunch an advo-
este of free-trade at home, he did not think
it politic to extend the principle to the colony of British
Guiana. The Noble Lord refused to sanctionn any re-
duction of the taxes because the combined Court had
previously guaranteed the supplies, in consideration of
an emigration order being granted to them by the
Colonial-office. His course, therefore, was plain.
lie would have his bond and nothing but
the bond, and told the colonies that if they con-
tinued to refuse the supplies they would be guilty of a
breach of faith. But so far from their having
been guilty of a breach of faith, they had
petitioned the Colonial-office in forma pauperis for a re-
duction of taxes, which they felt they were unable to
meet. But he (Mr. Bailey) maintained that it was
the Colonial-office who broke the contract, for the Noble
Lord refused to grant the emigration order, and the co-
lonists were therefore justified in refusing the supplies.
In the Mauritius there were the same causes of com-
plaint, but on reflection he thought it advisable to con-
fine his attention to the colony of Ceylon.
because the grievances of that island called for
the most urgene measures. The inhabitants said that
they had no confidence either in Earl Grey
or in the Right Hon. Centleman the Under Secretary for
the Colonies. How could they repose confi-
dence in a Minister who had attempted to de-
[LEFT SPEAKING.]

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Feb. 19.
MARRIAGES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Lord CAMPBELL rose to move the second reading
of a Bill for amending the law of marriages in Scotland.
He observed that in every well-governed country mar-
riage was a contract of which there should at all times
be satisfactory evidence, and that the status of the wo-
man should be one with respect to which there ought to
be no doubt. The present law of Scotland did not af-
ford this satisfactory evidence, because marriage might
be contracted iu various ways—by a clergyman, by a
simple declaration of marriage between the parties, by
a promise in futuro followed by cohabitation; and the
consequence of this was, that the woman was placed in
a very degraded position, and the state of things itself
was productive of an infinity of evils. Their Lord-
ships bad all heard of Gretna Green mar -
riages, but marriages were not alone celebrated
by a functionary at Gretna Green, that person
had rivals all along the borders; and he was told
that the late parson at Gretna Green had married no
less than 30,000 couples. Marriage was frequently gone
through as " a lark;" those who entered into that state
did not deem themselves to be bound by it, and they
fancied that at the end of the year they might make a
new excursion. What was desired was, that persons
entering into the marriage state should, for the future,
be married either by a clergyman of their own persua-
sion, or in presence of a public functionary, signing
their names to a document by which they declared them-
selves to be scan and wife, and which document should
for ever after be evidence of the fact. The Bill he pro •
posed proceeded upon the same principle as the Mar-
riage Bill of 1836. In England a person might go before
the clergyman or the rgistrar. The latter was seldom
resorted to in England. Such he believed would be the
case in Scotland. Persons would go before their pastor,
who would bestow upon them the nuptial benediction.
This Bill would prevent clandestine marriages, and, as
such, he trusted it would meet with the support of their
Lordships, as it was most desirable that whenever a mar-
riage did take place there should be evidence for all
future time of the fact.
The Earl of ABERDEEN observed that notwith-
standing the confidence expressed by the Noble and
Learned Lord on this subject, it was with some regret
that he felt bound to state some objections that he enter-
tained respecting it. His opposition to this measure
arose from the fact that he considered it uncalled for,
most impolitic, and likely to lead to most injurious re-
sults. Everybody admitted that it was desirable to have
a complete registration of births, marriages, and deaths;
but what he objected to was, that the Noble and Learned
Lord made a very great alteration in the law of Scot-
land, as a means of perfecting a system of registration.—
(Hear.) If the Noble and Learned Lord considered
the marriage law of Scotland defective, let him intro-
duce a Bill to amend the law; but to adopt such a
measure as this for the purpose of perfecting a system
of registration, was, in his opinion, a proceeding that
was quite preposterous. In England and Scotland
the cases were not similar. Hero a Bill had
been introduced to relieve the Dissenters from what
they considered a grievance imposed upon them
by Lord Hard wicke's marriage law, and which for the
purposes of marriage compelled them to repair to the
Established Church. In Scotland nothing of the kind
occurred. Every one was married by the minister of
the sect to which he belonged, and he could say that
clandestine marriages were very few in Scotland, and
that whenever they might occur no adequate remedy
was provided by this Bill. The marriage law had often
been the subject of discussion among all ranks of men
in Scotland, and some alteration in the law had fre-
quently been recommended by some of the greatest men
in the country; but who ever asked for such an altera-
tion as was proposed by the measure of the Noble and
Learned Lord?—(Hear, hear.) The uniform opinion
of the country, pronounced two years consecutively by
numberless petitions, while there was not one pre-
sented in its favour, deserved some attention from
their Lordships, and particularly in a case affecting,
or which might affect, the social condition of every
man in the country. The existing law had
worked well, and to the perfect satisfaction of the
people of Scotland. For centuries there had been no
complaint of the law, and the people living under it had
been distinguished for social and religious qualities.
The Noble and Learned Lord had stigmatised the people
of Scotland as living in ,a state nearly approaching the
" more ferarun." Their condition had been described
as very different by another Noble Lord, who had said
that, taking it altogether, Scotland was the best-condi-
tioned country on the face of the earth. Those Noble
Lords would not both support the Bill. As the measure
was one of restriction, he did say that the feeling of the
country was deserving of the attention of their Lord-
ships. Let their Lordships look at the 18th article of
the Union with Scotland, in which it is especially said
that laws affecting civil government and policy might be
made the same in all parts of the United King-
dom ; but the laws affecting private right should
be only altered for the evident utility of the people.
Now, the innumerable petitions against the Bill did not
show that the people thought the proposed alteration
would be for their benefit. Ile would entreat their
Lordships to consider that they were not legislating for
England, nor for a people governed by the same laws or
feelings as themselves—they were legislating for a
country the people of which were actuated by feelings
and prejudices, it might be, altogether different from
those of the people of this country; but to those feelings,
and even to those prejudices, it was their Lordships'
duty to give every attention. The law of Scotland was
the law of the whole of civilised Europe. They were
constantly borrowing from it, in order to render the
English law more perfect, and therefore it deserved all
respect and honour. The Bill proposed by the Noble
and Learned Lord imposed new restrictions upon the
constitution of marriage in Scotland. He held that it
was essential to the happiness and for the morality of
the people that marriage should be rendered as
easy as possible. Holding the opinion which their
Lordships naturally did it was difficult for them to
place themselves in that situation which it was necessary
to do in order to legislate for the people of Scot-
land. In England they held that the marriage tie was
indissoluble, however much their practice differed with
the principle. They said it was indissoluble, but they
almost daily dissolved it, not as a legislative act, but
acting as judiciaries. Nothing could be more incon-
sistent or more unjust than that. Although they held
marriage to be indissoluble, still they did not hold it to
be a sacrament; and in times shortly after the Reforma-
tion the tie was dissolved, but now there was no court
to pronounce such a judgment. He had been given to
understand that marriage being made a sacrament in
the Romish Church arose from a mistranslation—that
that which was properly translated " a great mystery,"
was translated in the vulgate " a great sacrifice;" but,
at all events, England was the only Protestant country
where marriage was indissoluble. He trusted the law of
Scctlaud would not be altered in that particular, because
he considered it was preferable to the law of England.
There were only two causes for which the law of
Scotland allowed a divorce, viz., adultery and wilful de-
sertion for four years. If it was essential that marriage
should be rendered easy, so was it equally necessary that
divorce should be difficult ; but as the law now stood, he
thought it was upon a rational and the best foundation.
A Noble Lord had warned their Lordships, upon a late
occasion, to consider what they were going to do. The
case before them was one in which it particularly be-
hoved their Lordships to consider what they were going
to do, and what was likely to be the effect of the
measure before them. He knew he vi as speaking the
sentiments of the great body of his countrymen, and
therefore he considered he had a right to press his
opinions upon the House. By the law of
Scotland marriage was a civil contract, the very
essence of which contract depended upon mutual con-
sent—that was the doctrine of the canon law as well as
of the civil law of Scotland. The Noble and Learned
Lord had said there were irregular marriages under the
law. But a written promise followed by cohabitation,
constituted and was recognised as a valid marriage. The
promise, however, must be a written one ; why, there-
fore, should a man be allowed to abandon such a con-
tract at his own pleasure. Under the present state of
the law seduction in Scotland was extremely rare ; in
England the eases were innumerable as compared with
those which occurred in Scotland. The law was a great
protection to the woman. Undoubtedly under the law
of Scotland, a man might be entrapped into a marriage
by an artful woman. Such a case might occur ; but for
one man that was entrapped, one hundred women were
entrapped and betrayed under the law of England ; and

certainly it was woman who most needed pro tection
For these reasons he saw no cau'e why that which was
now admitted as proof of a contract should not continue.
The same of a declaration of marriage before witnesses.
Rsinembeting always that marriage was considered as a
civil contract, although in fact nearly all parties made it
a religious ceremony; but as a civil contract he saw Co
reason why the solemn declaration before witnesses
should not be admitted to be as good proof of consent ca
a written promise. No length of cohabitation would
constitute a marriage in Scotland if nothing appeared to
prove that the parties had intended to contract a mar-
riage. Cohabitation would be considered prima facie
evidence of the fact, but even 20 years' cohabitatica
would not constitute a marriage without some evidence
of the consent of the parties. He would agree with
pleasure to improve the law by confining its provisions
strictly to persons having a proper Scotch domicile; for
though the people of Scotland had a great love for the
law themselves, they had no particular wish to extend
it elsewhere. Marriage was a most valuable right, and it
great privilege of the poor, and their Lordships ought
not to impose any further restriction upon it without
good grounds, which he contended had not yet been
shown. His object would be effected by the omission of
those words which restricted the marriage ceremony to
be performed "in two modes and no more." He was
satisfied with what had conduced so much to the hapPi"
ness, the morality, and the prosperity of the country.
Lord BROUGHAM acknowledged
,the question 10
be one of much importance, but, unfortunately, the melt'
sure had been married to another Bill, and it had re-
ceived all the odium which that other measure perhaps
deserved. It had been said by his Noble Friend that
the Registration Bill had been brought in to complete
the Marriage Bill: now just the reverse was the fact,
the Marriage Bill had been introduced to complete the
Registration Bill. That Bill contained a clause, the
schoolmaster clause, when it was last before the LegiS.
lature, which was as improper a clause as any be
had ever read, and it had given rise to much
feeling towards the Bill, great part of which Was
also improperly extended to the Marriage Bill. Almost
every lawyer had complained of the operation of the law.
It had been complained of by Lords Thurlce, Hard'
wicke, and Eldon. And no wonder it was complained
of' when advantage was taken of it to evade the law of
this country. He should support the Bill, because it
would throw impediments in the way of improper, mis"
chievous, and ill-considered marriages. Those only
amongst their Lordships before whom divorce cases were
brought could be aware of the difficulties consequent
upon the state of the law of marriage in Scotland. In
many instances it was impossible to tell whether the par-
ties were duly married, whether they were legitimate
or, if a second contract had been entered into, whether
they were guilty of bigamy or not. Scarcely two lawyers
could be got to give the same opinion with regard to it•
He agreed with the measure because he saw no other
means of putting an end to the difficulties which at pre-
sent existed. The Noble Earl near him (the Earl of
Aberdeen) suggested that the law respecting divorces
ought to be dealt with simultaneously with the law of
marriage, but he (Lord Brougham) thought that that
question ought to form the subject of a different measure.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said it appeared from re-
turns which he had moved for on the subject of English
and Scotch marriages and legitimacy, that during the
last eiohteen years, since the Scotch Consistorial Court
was abolished, and the business of it transferred to the
Court of Session, there had been only six appeals front
that court to their Lordship's House ; therefore, the
Noble and Learned Lord had very little right to coin'
plain that the time of the House had been much °ens'
pied in settling disputes respecting Scotch marriages.
The whole number of cases that had come before the
Court of Session during that period was 104.
Lord CAMPBELL—And in those 104 cases 35 of the
parties concerned were found to have been legally War'
ried, 34 were discovered not to have been legally mar-
ried ; and the question with respect to the rest could not
be settled.—(A laugh.)
The Duke of ARGYLL said he did not believe that
this Bill had been introduced for the sake of completing
the registration of marriages. Te principal objection,
of the Noble Earl opposite appeared to be, that the Bill
limited in an undue and dangerous. degree_the. facilities
for contracting marriages. He (the Duke of Argyll)'
however, did not believe that it would have any sue",
effect. Under the existing law marriages were legs'
which took place before clergymen of all denominations;
and it was not proposed to alter that system. The 131,1:
would have the effect of foreclosing for the future all
irregular marriages, and continuing the system of mar'
rying before clergymen of all denominations, and also
before registrars. But, as the Noble Earl had trilly
said, such was the moral and religious feeling of the
people of Scotland, that very few marriages were con'
traded except before clergymen. The measure could,
therefore, make very little change in the law, and the,.
Noble Earl's objections to it were, he thought, devoid of
force. It appeared to him that the Bill provided every faci-
lity for contracting marriages that it was necessary 1
provide; and he trusted that no misapprehension would
go forth to Scotland with respect to its real object and
tendency. It would make no difference whatever in the
practice of contracting marriages in that country.
The Earl of EGLINTON objected to the measure on
the ground of the great expense it would entail tipt?!n
the people of Scotland in carrying it out. If the 1310
bad the effect of driving the people from the registrars
to the clergymen he should cordially support it, but the
matter was left to the option of the parties. It WO
true that the fees for marriages before the registrars
were higher than before clergymen, and that was cer-
tainly an inducement to go before the latter. He Po:
ferred the clergymen to the registrars, but he preferred
the registrars to the blacksmiths.
Lord CAMPBELL replied,
The two Bills were then read a second time.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF CMMONS, Feb. 19.
HABEAS CORPUS SUSPENSION (IRELAND)
BILL.
On the order of the day being read for the third WO-
ng of this Bill,
Mr. OSBORNE rose to present a petition from
bitants in the parish of St. Pancras, calling on the Housenot to pass the Bill, and to cease to administer the affairs
of Ireland altogether, and to allow the people of Os
country to administer the government themselves."'
(Hear, and laughter.)
Mr. J. O'CONNELL said, as he did not wish to have
a double debate, he should postpone his observations
until the Noble Lord the Member for Aylesbury
amendment came on.
Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR then rose to address
the House, but the noise consequent upon a great nutubet
of the Members simultaneously leaving the House wss s 0
great that for some moments the Hon. Member I"
wholly inaudible in the gallery. He was understood
tie
say that he was very much surprised to find, after tie
statement of the Right Hon. the Secretary for the
Home Department, that no English Gentleman in t",.
House had thought it his duty in the House to do more
than give a passive acquiescence to this Bill. There Was
time when this Bill would not have been allowed to Po
without some more urgent reasons having been assigue',
for its necessity than had been assigned by the Hon..Balle°
net the Secretary for the Home Department. Notwitu•
standing that many gentlemen had attempted to express
their views on this Bill, there was not one from first to
last who had touched it. The Honourable Member for
Bandon assigned as a reason for supporting the
Bill that he was foreman of a grand jury is
Ireland. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for
Tam worth, in accordance with his usual maxim, said he
would return good for evil. The Government had op'
posed the Right Hon. Baronet on the appropriation clause,
mad he retorted by supporting the present measure.
The Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire entered into dissertation on free trade, and the Honourable Gen:
m tlean said he was not only prepared to give 11'5
assent to the stopping of agitation for the re'
peal of the union, but to put down all agitatiell'
But now it seemed quite unnecessary to make
out Of,
reason for the passing of such a measure as this. Such
used not to be the case formerly ; and oh for,
the days of Fox, Pitt, Romilly, and all theft
noble compeers. But their days were past, and
an epoch seemed to have arrived when private in:
terests were in the eyes of Members of Parliamen"
paramount to the consideration of the most serious
inroads upon the:constitution, and when a matter vitaalli,
affecting the interests of Ireland was to be introduce'
to their notice, scarcely a House could be formed,
yet when a private Bill was to occupy their attention
upwards of 170 Members were ready to tender their
votes. Such was the feeling, or rather the comparative
feeling with which great national grievances in Ire
land and petty advantages in England were viewed'
So much for the sympathy of England for Ireland'
Lord Clarendon says that the object of this Bill is to
II
put a atop to the agitation which, for thirty years, "s
distracted Ireland. The Right Hon. Baronet the Seel,:
tary of Ireland says that this Bill is simply
recal capital to the country. The Noble Lord at tie
head of the Government says that it has 01/'
thing whatever to do with the agitation for
peal. but simply to enforce the views of the Lora•
Lieutenant. To which of those authorities was b• t 0 ~.
refer? In none could he place any reliance, Le(t
when Lord Stanley, was a Member of that House, he had
expressed his opinion that a very sufficient reason eV'
to be assigned before any suspension of thl
liberties of the country took place.—(Hear, hear.)
The Whigs had ever made Ireland their battle-field,
the late Mr. C. Buller had warned them of the ad°P-
tion of this course ; he had said as long as
O'Coenell lived Ireland would be in an lnei'-
pient rebellion, but when he was gone it would
,1,
become an open one. If such a measure as
had been proposed at the outbreak of the French re-
volution in February last, it might have been tolerable'
but at the present moment it was uncalled for'
It was to the Right Honourable Baronet the Melnb—
,
for Tam worth that the people of Ireland looked fortis
redress of their grievances, and not to the Noble r-,0!
at the head of the present Government.—(Hear, )
Government could not rec Jive the allegiance of t,
people of Ireland until they pursued a more liberal Prig'
ciple towards them. The proceedings of the Gov/ono:le o
nd
proved this. They had had five
sessions of Oyer art
terminer in Dublin, and yet there still remained fival),,lo
soners to be disposed of, so bungling and clumsy had l3T,;11
the course of the law officers. But it was said this sa'
was to be followed by remedial measures. What
were they ? He had a right to an answer tnn
that question, for this Bill would not put to
to the agitation for the repeal of the
(Hear)—t it would prevent every Ivan to
frivg
Ireland, no matter whether he was loyal or not, making •
urged
a single struggle in defence of his rights. Why vvd
farce this mode of legislation was. It was *ase
that the measure was proposed to secui:o
•
protcction of the loyal and well-disposed 10
Ire
land! What nonsense! Instead of its affording
such protection it would make the loyal discontentsto
and unless some measures for removing the sociel eh" er
of Ireland, and extending the sufferages °Lula
people, . were
_shortly proposed Government wy