The Sun.
London, England, 1825-03-14 00:00:00

NEW TIMES]

The second reading of the Dissenters' Marriage
Bill conies on this evening in the House of Corn-
mons.—Of this Bill some • ery erroneous notions
have gone abroad. Its origin may be thus traced.
Prior tp the Marriage Act of 1753, the inarriagi..s
of Dissenters contracted in, the face of their con-
gregations were held valid in the Courts of Law.
,That Act declared all Marriages not celebrated
in a Church (except by special licence) invalid ;
and _Marriages could not be celebrated in. a
Church otherwise than according to the ritual
:of the Church of England; consequently no par-
ties- could contract a legal Marriage otherwise
' than :by the rites and ceremonies of the Church of
England. Persons who felt'conscientiousseruples
against those rites, and cermooies, proposed-vari-
ous means, of relief from this bUrthen. -A Bill
was brought into 'Parliament,: providivi that
'cases of the marriage of certain Dissenters 'the
Clergy of the Church of England should salon-
nize.matrimony agreeably to' the scruples of the
parties to be. married. But to this it was ob-
jected, that in order to relieve the consciences.of
the, officiating Clergy, and .moreover that the
House of Commons, as such,. had no right to re-
gulate the rites anti ceremonies of the Church,
these being subject to - a different authority,
that of the Bishops, Archbishops, and King.
A new mode of obviating the evil complained of
was then devised. Let the Dissenter, it was
said, be exempted solely from the religious cere-
mony which hurts his conscience ; but let him in
every other respect conform to all the regulations,
and pay all the dues which the churchman does.
Let his banns be published in the Church, or, if
he be married by licence, let the licence begiVen
by the Ecclesiastical authority ; let his marriagebe
registered- by the, Minister of the parish in the
Parish Register, and let itiMpay to the Clergyman
the same fee for registering_ which he now does for
marrying,: itishort, let him gain no pecuniary profit
'by:marrying at hiS Meeting-house, nor any .other
,'benett whatever, except the liberty of contract-

lug. marriage in a manner agreeable to his own
conscience. A Bill to this effect was brought into
the House of Lords in 1823 by Lord Lansdown,
and as supported by Lord. Liverpool and the
Archbishop of Canterbury. .The former of
these Noble, Peers declared the object of the
Bill to a certain extent expedient and neces-
sary, and the argument for it unanswerable.—
.Jews and Quakers (his .Lordship observed)
were already allowed to marry in their own
forms, and why not other religious communities?
The Archbishop of Canterbury observed, that
the English Church was truly, a tolerat:t Church ;
for this, especially, as well as for other reasons,
that she lays no claim to infallibility : and (con-
fining the relief to matters of doctrine) his Grace
declared himself friendly to, the relief proposed
by the Bill. After these high authorities
in favour of, some measure of relief, it is not
surprising that the aggrieved parties pursue
their object bey further. applications to the Le-
gislature. In the farmer instance the Bill ap-
plied too all 'persons dissenting or differing from
the. Church of England. . Objections were made
to this as of too wide extent ; and therefore the
present Bill is brought forward for particular re-
lief of the Unitarians. It is clear,, however, that
if they succeed in their application, other classes
of Dissenters will apply for a similar indulgence ;
and upon similar principles of toleration their
prayer must be granted.

[MORNING CHRONICLE.]
Sir Francis Burdett is of opinion that field
sports are entitled to particular favour, because
they contribute to the health of 'Squires. The
health of 'Squires is undoubtedly a matter of the
greatest public concern, and some sacrifice of
private property, and of the tranquillity of stags,
foxes, hareS, horses, hounds, partridges, phea-
sants, Sz.c. may- be well made, in order to keep
the country gentlemen in keen appetites ,and
good digestions. They are a body of men
fruges consumere nati, born for no visible pur-
pose but to consume the fruits of the earth, and
accordingly it behoves us to keep them in eating
order. When, therefore, we have the happiness to
see one of these worthies fulfilling his high des-
tiny, performing his allotted duty, the great end
of his being, by swallowing for his breakfast a
couple of pounds of ham, a cold partridge, a fowl,
3 turkey's eggs, half a dozen rolls, besides some
kickshaw-nonsense, such as muffins, toast with
marmalade, and so forth, we glorify the Consti-
tution that has perpetuated so gifted a race of
eaters, and in the pride of the moment when
witnessing the triumph of the British sto-
mach, we hold the Game Laws no evil, and
magnify the virtues of field sports. But
on maturer reflection, when the viands are
out of sight, when the prowess of the hunter's
appetite is not present to dazzle our judgment,
we begin to question whether the pursuit of game,
with its thousand attendant mischiefs, is the only
means by which the physical functions of the
biped from the country, in buckskin breeches,
can be preserved in good repair—if, it be the
only means, break down fences, ride over
crops, demoralise peasants, make and then tran-
sport poachers, shoot trespassers,' do all these
things or a thousand more in the name of Par-
liament, so that the 'Squires have their health ;
but if there be another way of keeping these gentle-