The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-08 00:00:00

TIIE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY MORNING, JUNE 8, 184/.

tamed in the letter of the Colonial Secretary, Mr. Glad-
stone, and requested to be informed of the names, the
dates, and the specific charges which were made against
him. He also said that he would lay the letter of the
Colonial Secretary, of the 30th of April, before the
Executive Council, that the whole matter might undergo
full investigation. That letter was written by Sir E.
Wilmot, to the Colonial-office, and it was worthy of
him, as being an honest man, guiltless of the charges
made against him. -- (Hear, hear.) Having left
the charges before the Council, a Committee was
appointed to investigate their, and the result was that
they acquitted his Excellency of the charges. They also
stated that the Bishop of Tasmania and the Right Rev.
Dr. Wilson, a Catholic Bishop of the colony, would be
shortly in London, end would bear testimony to the good
conduct of his Excellency. They certified, in the most
explicit terms, that as far as they could ascertain, no-
thing had transpired to justify the charges which had
been made. There was also a document, signed by all
the officials and principal people of the colony, to Sir E.
Wilmot, on his resigning the government of the colony,
that he carried with him into private life their best
wishes. Mr. Gladstone's reply was that he
was not dismissed in corsequence of any
specific . charge, but of the general notoriety
in the colony of the badness of his character. Now
these charges he (Mr. Spooner) had shown had been
denied by every gentleman and every Christian in the
colony, and that all the statements were false in every
respect. (The Hon. Gentleman then read a letter to the
eldest son of Sir Eardley Wilmot from Mr. Gladstone,
which stated that there was more than a full acquittal of
the charges brought against him in the memorial signed
by the inhabitants of Van Diemen's Land.) With these
testimonials, he was sure that the House would join in
the acquittal they already pronounced. But he did not
rest his case only there ; he had a letter from a person
whose name would be well received in that House—the
Bishop of Tasmania—(Hear, bear)—which spoke
most highly and favourably of Sir Eardley Wilmot.
and designated the rumours respecting him as false and
slanderous. The Hon. Gentleman then read a letter
from the Catholic bishop of the colony (Dr. Wilson)
which also gave from personal knowledge the most
unqualified contradiction to the unfounded slander
against the moral character of Sir Eardley Wilmot.
The family had a right to complain of the conduct of
the Noble Lord at the head of the Colonial-office, who
had refused to give the accused the opportunity of
defending himself. Such conduct was not to be
expected from him who had ever set himself up to
be the jealous defender of pubic liberty.—(Hear, hear.)
To say the least of it, his answer to heartrending
appeals was celtl. unfeeling. and hardly to be expected,
Lord BROOKE, after the clear statement of his Hon.
Friend, felt that little remained !br him to do than concur
in what he had dare. Ho regretted and deprecated the
anonymous charges which had been made against Sir
Eardley Wilmot. But documents had been laid before
the House, on the ground of which he did boldly expect
an entire acquittal of that gentleman scharacter troai the
stain which had ben thrown upon it.
Sir R. PEEL said he rose to express his opinion then
upon the subject, hecatne he had stood in the
same relation to Sir Eattlley Wilmot as the lion. Gen-
tleman who had spoken before him. He had been one
of his constituents ; he knew the manner in which he
had discharged his duty ; and he was influenced by the
same f,elings as the Honourable Gentleman who
had already spoken. He welt knew the circum-
stances under which his Right Honourable Friend
the Secretary for the Colonies had made that
appointment which placed Sir Eardley Wilmot in
office as Governor of Van Diemen's Land. The re-
sponsibility of an appointment, such as that, was great,
for a colony so distant. His H .n. Friend did Lot wish
to appoint a military gentleman to an office where he
should be called to exercise the duties of a civil func-
tionary. But the sole reason for appointing Sir Eardley
Wilmot to the governorship of that colony, was his ex-
perience in the administration of the law as a magistrate
for a long period at quarter sessions. Having him ap-
pointed to that office by the universal voice, having
filled that office with entire approbation, and having as
a Member of this House directed his attention to the
amendment of the Criminal Law, it was thought that it
was not possible to find a better or superior individual to
fill that appointment. But he (Sir R. Peel stood in an-
other relation to Sir Eardley Wilmot. He had been
connected with the Government in which his Hon.
Friend Mr. Gladstone held office, and he would now
speak of the feelings of Mr. Gladstone in reference to
these charges. As for the grounds on which he thought
proper to remove Sir Eardley Wilmot from the appoint-
ment which he held, his Hon. Friend who first spoke on
the subject had exercised a wise discretion in declining
to enter upon them at all. Those were points which
could not with much rood effect, and with very little
propriety, be canvassed in that House. He must say,
however, that Mr. Gladstone, in writing to Sir
Eardley Wilmot, had not advised his withdrawal
on account of any neglect of the duties of
his office, but the peculiar position of the colony,
and the general tenor of his dispatches indicated the
propriety of the appointment of his successor. It was
admitted then, that no neglect of his own had led to his
removal from office. He (Sir R Peel) spoke now of
the public character of Sir E. Wilmot. But his Friend
Mr. Gladstone was placed in a most peculiar position
by the private information which was conveyed to him.
There were three persons—persons in the colony, and
living independently of the Govenment, voluntarily con-
firmed the rumour which had re.iched his ears, and
which had been spread in New South Wales. These par-
ties, all of unimpeachable character, informed his friend
that the character of Sir Eardley Wilmot was such as to
unfit him for the discharge of his pubic duties. That
rumour, and that confirmation, had not influenced Mr.
Gradstone in what he had dude, fur the removal of Sir
E. Wilmot was an act done independently of such a
report, or such thanes. At the same time his friend
did not think it weuld be consistent to re-appoint him to
another colony till such charges upon his character had
been totally cleared off. What was Mr. Gladstone to do?
It was right that Sir Eardley Wilmot should know the
charges winch had been made against him. Mr. Glad-
stone. therefore, in a private dispatch, made the commu-
nication to him. 1.1- ith a view to that, as one of the
pintos giving the information was within the colony, he
was applied to for liberty to use his name, in connexion
with the charge ; but that was refused.—(Hear, hear.)
And his lion. Friend had stated that the trieuds of Sir E.
Wilmot had received the admission from the other two
that the charges were false. On the pert then cf his
Hon. Friend. he had to state to the House his entire con-
viction tbat that information was totelly and entirely
wrong, and that Sir Eardley Wilmot was entitled at his
hands, to the full admission, that the charges aff. cting
his private character were without foundation. That
admission, and such a statement, as it was but justice to
the character of the deceased, must also be highly satis-
factory to his friends. He (Sir R. Peel) only added,
that having heard the documents and statements brought
before the House by his friend the Member for B.rming-
ham, documents that had been drown up by sir Eardley
Wilmot, looking at the nature of the charges, and the
character of those who made them, he also expressed his
own opinion that those charges must be considered en-
tirely and totally without foundaton. He f.-lt that this
was but an act of justice to the character of the late Sir
B. Wilmot, and to the widow and the family whom he
had left behind him. (The Right lion. Baronet resumed
his seat amid applause.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL did not feel it necessary to
add anything to what had been said by the hon. Gentle-
man the Member for Tamworth, more than that it must
be a source of satisfaction to the family ot Sir E. Wilmot
that that Hon. Gentleman and Mr. Gladstone had both
expressed their strong conviction that the imputations
made upon his character were without foundation.
He would not have risen but for the seeming
imputation which was thrown by an Hon. Member upon
the character of the Noble Lord in the Colonial office.
Lord Grey had merely heard that there was an accusa-
tion against the character of Sir E. Wilmot—he had no
means of knowing whether it was founded in truth ; he
did not know the names of the parties who made the
charge, and what was more, he did not have the evi-
dence on which these individuals founded their charge.
He had, therefore, no means of arriring at any judg-
ment upon the subject ; but surely, because the Noble
Earl had said in his letter that he could not
recommend to her Majesty, the rew appointment of Sir
E. Wilmot was not to be charged with having adopted
the charges upon his character. There were reasons
altogether irrespective of these for suet a course in a
Member of the Government As for the conduct of Mr.
Gladstone, as to the propriety of the course which he had
taken, he would not then deliver any opinion. But he
only hoped that the Hon. Member (Mr. Spooner), and
the friends of Sir E. Wilmot, would remember what-
ever opinions might be held by the present Government
or the public in general as to his administration, that all
these charges upon his private character hid been swept
to the winds, and that his son might rest satisfied that hts
lived under no dishoaeurable imputation.
Mr. VERNON SMITH said that in the speech of the
Hon. Gentleman, he only regretted that some symptom
of party character seemed to pervade it. and although it
bieetnsel to h•tve the wish to do jostled, yet a spirit of
party pervaded all his observedons. He tnought that,
oi all the duties which were imposed upon Secret. ries of
State, the meat sacred was that of protecting the cha-
ra rs of those who were absent in foreign countries on
the eervice o their King and ceuntn , and that no
or permitted to tie made. against
t -,h,;ul:l;'oe me le,
them, tinlses ttpoti tie trickt poedee an 1 cant wive proo:
.4 their deliequency. Ira tees ireeatie, the name of the
p aty suekiee- tee eeces ethyl. etas eethhehl ; and ashy
the cdarabee ut an, Lease who was rsonally
einido-:ed in the service ut its coun.ry, be open to
charges of a nameless aceu.ne.--(llear, hear.)
He was here to edinit that Me Gladstone, as tar
as the privete 1.:-rings ot Sir Eardley Wilmot
were concerned, had done all in his power to allay the
sore which his previous conduct had created ; but he
thought that the previous charge which had ,:cen made,
had been made harshly, and upon very uncertain evi-
dence.

4
Mr. NEWDFGA.TE said that he had not intended to
have said a wor,l
on this subject,. but tae 13,:glit lion.
Gentleman Wcolano_ hail just sat down,
.had handled Mr.
Grey had not. po.rsaotlight it most un?ortunute that Lord
the nober
''Z'Slisnt
no.)
lideut..,t very rpughly—almost too much so.
Noble Lord at the ul7.' of the Government, of disavow-
ing made against the name of a
ing the scandalous charges course adopted by the
said that lit was rei.oce:l to be able
soasiziieion
decseiars
J.
upnitbkicalizr .
that the shade or taint of tO say
been raised against the which had
had bean entirely removed. vfi_it... J E. Wilmot
the conduct of the present c, lonial r(zl,s"eecet to
that
_there was no zr.iuodof
after he (Sir J. Until:l.in) sat down, ihe gf:ntletnan -vvh,
conapu.ar4,
he thought
representA that office i.n the House would rise and state
i
that there was no vestige of any accusation against Si;
E. Wilmot remained in that Au& With. regard to the
conduct of Mr. Glad..3:4ne, the v.ecus,:tousrnade against
Sir E. Wilmot were made by three individuals upon
such strong authority, that no Secretary of State would

have been justified in overlooking them. Two of these
genth men were at present in Van Diemen's Land, and
the third had shrunk from allowing his name to come
forward as one of his accusers.—(Hear, hear.) Mr.
Gladstone had done all in his power to soften the harsh-
ness of Sir E. Wilmot's recal as tar as it could be done,
and in all proceedings towards him Mr. Gladstone had
adopted the very kindest course. He put before Sir
Eardley Wilmot the accusations :made against him, and
gave him every assistance in his power to enable
him to clear himself. These charges had since been
entirely disproved, and he was glad to be able to say
that the character of Sir E. Wilmot, both public and
private, bad been freed from any taint or suspicion.
The only fault of Mr. Gladstone was by sending that
private letter which warned Sir E. Wilmot of the position
in which he stood.
Mr. HAWES said that he had hardly thought that
it would be necessary for him to rise upon that occasion.
With regard to what his Hon. Friend the Member for
Birmingham had stated, it was not altogether accurate:
His Noble Friend near him was not cognisant of what
was alleged against Sir Eardley Wilmot except through
a dispatch from that gentleman him-elf. lie agreed
with his Noble Friend that no record of accusation ex-
isted in the Colonial-office against Sir E. Wilmot. He
did not wish to cast any reproach upon Mr. Gladstone.
Atter a few words from Sir C. DOUGLAS,
Mr. CURTEIS said that he did not envy the feelings
of those three gentlemen who originated the calumny
against Sir E. Wilmot. It' they had not caused that
gentleman's death, they at least embittered his dying
moments, and he must describe them as foul calumnia-
tors. He objected to the conclusion of the address of
the Hon. Member for Birmingham. He merely rose to
show the three gentlemen to whom he alluded that a
strong feeling existed as to their conduct, and from the
expression of that feeling he had not shrunk.—(Hear.)
Mr. BORTHWICK said the lion. Member for Tam-
worth had asserted that the grounds upon which Sir E.
Wilmot had been recalled were not public; but no doubt
his recal was produced by some circumstances stated in
the secret dispatches. Whether communications to
which allusions had been made were, or were not,
anonymous, they were sufficient to induce Mr. Glad-
stone to act upon them, and to inflict upon an innocent
man a deep injury. The Governor was sacrificed in this
case, and the calumniators were protected. It was quite
clear that the present Colonial Secretary had nothing to
do with the matter, however it might be sought by the
predecessors of the present Ministry to attach to them
the odium of an act of which they alone were culpable.
Mr. HORSMAN said that he rose merely to ask
whether the Hon, Member for Birmingham had fur-
nished the name of the Gentleman in question to the
Colonial-office, and whether it was intended to take any
steps respecting this. which was called a soul conspiracy.
As regarded the other part of the transaction connected
with Mr. Gladstone, of which they had heard so much
that evening, he must say, particularly anxious as he
was to avoid any personal allusion, that he felt it impos-
sible to refrain from saying that he (Mr. Gladstone),
though he had acted candidly in forwarding the secret
letter to Sir .Eardley Wilmot, still that his conduct was
extremely rash and extremely indefensible. It had
been admitted that he had acted indiscreetly. In con-
clusion, he must say that public duty called upon- them
to express their opinion strongly when a public man had
been grievously treated.
Mr. SPOONER, said he did not know the name of
the gentleman alluded to.
Mr. HORSMAN said he held a high official situation.
Mr. SPOONER said he did not know the person al-
luded to.
Captain GLADSTONE said that the Hon. Gentle-
man who had just sat down, had expressed his regret
gret that the late Secretary for the Colonies had not at
tne bottom of his letter to Sir E. Wilmot, senior, ex-
pressed his sorrow, and avowed his indiscretion, in the
course lie had pursued. ile could assure the House that
his Right Hon. relative had been only actuated by a
sense of kindness in his conduct to Sir E. Wilmot. He
deeply regretted that the charges had been made, but
his defence rested on these charges, for he could not
have acted otherwise in his position, than to have asked
the recal of the Governor of Van Diemen's Land. If
they knew the names of the parties who had made the
accusation, they would feel the difficulty in which his
Right Hon. relative was placed.
Mr. ROEBUCK seid that he did not know why they
should not have the names of these gentlemen, who heel
informed " my Right Hon. relative" of these untruths
which had led to the disgrace and recal of an honest
man. He had his own thoughts of what con- tituted
official reserve when he,found that the charges of knaves
wete received to the ruin of honest men. The accusa-
tion must have been a grave one, which would lead to
the recal of a Governor of one of their Colonies, and
why were they not supplied with the names of the par-
ties making these accusation, without making any enquiry
into the truth of these charges this gentleman was
dismissed.—(No, no.)—No, no why lie was punished ;
he was dismissed.—(No, no.) Then, if he was not dis-
missed on account of this accusation, for what reason
was he dismissed ? Why, they had the reasons of die.
Missal given in the private letter of the Secretary him-
self. He stated that the reason for his recal was im-
moral conduct ; he stated that he could not recommend
him to any other appointment, because of his immoral
conduct ; he stated that he was incapable of governing
the colony, because of his immoral conduct. But what
was the specific accusation, and the date of it ? Let the
House learn that, if it was intended to satisfy it,
But it was also the case that ignorance, audacity, anti
mischief had always characterit-ed their government of
the colonies. He hoped that the time would soon arrive
when they should n -a be burdened with an irresponsible
Colonial Administration.
Mr. HOPE said he should not follow the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman through the whole of the charges
which be made against the Colonial Administration.
The grounds on which Sir Eardley Wilmot was recalled,
were of a public kind, and had no reference to his private
character. Earl Grey had expressed his satisfaction at
that recal; he had admitted that the grounds on which
Sir Eardley Wilmot was recalled, was sufficient, without
any reference to his private character. He (Mr. Hope)
could, if the House required it, show what were these
public grounds, and he was sure that they would be
deemed amply sufficient to justify that removal.
Mr. B. ESCOTT said that he distinctly charged the
late Secretary for the Colonies with having dismissed
Sir Eardley Wilmot on the faith of these anonymous
calumnies. The Hon. Member refused to give the dates
of these charges, but they were contained in the dispatch
itself. That dispatch was dated the 30th April, 1846,
which was the d.ete of the very private letter which re-
called Sir Eardley Wilmot on the ground of hie immoral
conduct. Well, he had said he would not take up the
time of the House with the personal part of this subject,
and he would keep his word. Now, with regard to the
general question, he could not help thinking that the
present Government had passed over the claims of Sir
Eardley Wilmot in a very cavalier manner, and the
question for that House to decide was this, were the
colonies always to be governed upon :dr. Gladstone's
principles. A defence of Mr. Gladstone had been at-
tempted by those who were associated with him in
office, but he ventured to doubt its honesty, or why were
not the names, upon which this unfounded charge wes
made, not disclosed ?—(Hear, hear.) This case was
very similar to one he had formerly brought before the
House, when a public officer was dismissed from office
upon insufficient grounds, and he really thought it too
much to be called upon to rest satisfied with the declara-
tion that Mr. Gladstone had discovered his error, and
repented what he had done. The House ought to have
some guarantee in future that more caution would be
used by her Majesty's Government in cases of this sort.
Sir WALTER JAMES really must protest against
the language used by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
who had just sat down, while speaking of his Right
Hon. Friend the late Secretary for the Colonies. The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman pronounced his defence to
be dishonest, but he fur one did not think so. He felt
convinced that his Right Honourable Friend dismissed
Sir Eardley Wilmott, upon public grounds, and not upon
the faith of charges against that Gentleman's personal
character.
Mr. W. MILES would not allow the sincere friend-
ship he entertained for the late Right Hon. Gentleman,
the Secretary for the Colonies, to interfere with his
arriving at an impartial conclusion upon this painful
topic ; but he could not bring himself to the belief that
his Right lion. Friend entertained the feelings attributed
to him by the Hon. Gentleman opposite. He felt confident
that his Right Hon. Friend wrote the letter to which so
much allusion had been made, with the view of giving
Sir E. Wilmot an opportunity of clearing his character,
while he was no less certain that Sir E. Wilmot's dis-
missal was founded upon public grounds and public
grounds alone. His Right Hon. Friend felt that Sir E.
Wilmot was not competent to perform the functions of
governor of £0 important a colony as South Australia.
and it was through that conviction the dismissal was
agreed upon.—(Hear.) It was no great charge to
make against a man that he could not govern a
colony, when some of the most experienced Members
of that House found the task to be a very diffieult mat-
ter. So far as that charge was concerned, therefore, it
went for nothing, and he attached no importance to it.
It did not lessen Sir E. Wilmot in his estimation, nor
would it have lessened him in the estimation of his Right
Hon. Friend the Secretary for the Colonies, for he
knew that had he remained in office be would have ems
ployed Sir E. Wilmot in another capacity the moment
that Sir Eardley had cleared his character from the im-
putation that had been cast upon it. So far as the let-
ter was concerned, he thou g_ the triele:s of Sir Eardley
Wilmot were iedebted to Right Hon. Friend for
bringing about these explanations, because they would
teach future colonial Governments that they could not
ba too cautious in entertaining charges against honour-
able individuals entrusted with the government of dis-
tant colonies.
Sir R. H. INGLIS thought it a matter of regret that
the tone of the debate for the last hour hail been so
widely different from that at its comtnencemeat. The
debate began with a speech mote of sorrow than anger
by the Hon. Member for Birmingham, and his defence
of the injured Sir Eardley Wilmot was considered by
all parsons present as complete and triumphant. Not a
single angry word was heard in the debate until within
the last hour, and he hoped that the subject would now
he brought to a conclusion similar to thr..t, of ifs com-
rceneernent, so as to *Ward opportunity for the House to
proceed with the other business before it.
The subject then. droppt,d,
REGISTERV:G BIRTHS AND MARRIAGES
(S',:OTLA ND) BILL.
The order of the day was then 'read for going into
Committee on these Bills.
Several petitions were presented against these
The LORD-ADVOCATE said that he was happy
that, he did not stand in the way of the motion of the
[lon. Mcrnber for Birmingham; seeing the very able
manner in which he gad P,rforaied the duty wiiich de-
volve.; upon him. He w:ett:d new eedeevour shortly to
L:ll%otlfo'' births pi
arTna3tPha tretri marriages. I.3rf' t will'
ri sh
couldil :r.'
duibic(el the Go-
Oat the Nkiect anticipated by the sills waseogdisoturbat-
•
a very lal•

portant one, fur the purpose of affording accurate statis-
tical and other important information. For the considera-
tion. of the course proposed to be followed in carrying
out the Bill, the Government had to bear in mind that
a system of registration had existed for ten years in
England. After mature consideration it was decided
that a plan similar to that proposed in England should
be adopted in that country, and it was therefore proposed
that a central registration office should be established at
Edinburgh, with numerous other districts or divisions.
The existing town clerks of the larger towns of that
country could afford the opportunity of immediately
carrying out the provisions of the Bill at considerably less
expense than in this country. With respect to the ex •
penses of carrying out the Bill, it was not proposed that
any advances should be made from the Treasury to meet
the expenses of carrying Qut the measure, but that local
taxation should be made to support the whole of the system.
He thought that if he attempted to raise the expense of
this registration from the personal or real property of
Scotland. such a rate would not be favourably received.
It then became a question with him, what course, under
these circumetances, he should adopt, and alter a care-
ful consideration of the subject, he could see nothing
more expedient, more cheap, more convenient, or more
just than a parochial rate, as proposed in this Bill. Ile
knew there were strong obj• cti ins to this mode of rating,
but of the various proposals that were made to defray
the expenses of the registration, it appeared to him to
be the most eligible. He had asked those who objected
to this mode of assessment, what other course they
would propose, . but none of them were able to
give him a sattgae!ory solution to that question.
There were 786 session clerks, 423 inspectors of the
poor, and many of them held various offices, such as
clerks
also other offices of various kinds ; and
he found that a schoolmaster, who had been one of the
the
heritors, of s session, s i
andon , collectors of the poor-rates, clerks to
great leaders of the movement against these Bills, was a
session clerk, an inspector of the poor, a collector of the
pootarates, clerk to the heritors, and held, besides, sevemi
odtidher the offl
dutyes—
Cres of
hear ")—in fact, hee
( of e
"Hear,
etherle offices. They were
told that registers were kept in Scotland ; so there
were in England before the Registration Act ; but
as the best results had followed from this Act,
in England. and as great evils prevailed in Scotland
from the inefficient system in use, he thought it ought
no longer to exist, and that the Bill
,before the House
ought to be pared to remedy- it. In fact the system
pursued in Scotland was utterly useless. Intimately
connected with registration was the subject of marriage.
Both the common and statute law of Scotland required
nothing more to render a marriage valid than the con-
sent of the parties, of the age of maturity—no consent of
their guardians was necessary, nor was the intervention
of any minister of religion necessary to perform the
ceremony. Perhaps he 'Light be met with this argu-
ment—that it was a salutary principle to make marriage
depend upon the deliberate consent of the parties ;
but, nevertheless, it was pregnant of evil, as
there was no standard—there were no fixed rules or
criterion of what was a valid or invalid marriage, and
such contracts might be proved either by writing or
merely by parole evidence. If a man and woman pro-
msised to marry each other, and counexion followed, the
law said that such a contract was insuperable from a
mass of inconsistent facts the law might infer marriage.
He had known cases proved from letters which had been
exchanged between the rattles, but the marriage of
which were so obscure that the judges trembled at the
decision which they were obligt d to give. Under such
a state of things could it be wondered at that most lament-
table cases were repeatedly brought before the courts of
justice. There was a case which had given rise to one of
the most distinguished judgment; ever delivered from the
Bench. A gentlemen of birth, who afterwards became
the inheritor of a very high title in Scotland, and very
rich estates, contracted a marriage of this kind with a
lady in 1802 or 1803 ; but the marriage between them
imply consisted in letters which had passed between
them. They never lived together Ike married people.
In 1808 the gentleman came to England. Being a man
of no honour in this respect, and thinking, perhaps, that
evidence of his former marriage had been destroyed, he
contracted a marriage ith a lady who was connected
with one of the very highest families in England. There
was no issue ; but soon after their marriage, a suit was
commenced against the husband by his former wife, and
the decision of the Court annulled the second marriage,
and the lady thus divorced was doomed to much degra-
Aation in consequence. But let them suppose a case in
ehich a title or extensive property was involved, and
'hey would perceive how great the evil was which he
;ought to remedy. There was not a country in the
:ivilised world in which the law of marriage was so un-
justifiable as in Scotland. The banns of marriage were
published generally in an inaudible voice, and at a time
that the congregation were either in the act of assemb-
ling or dispersing, not as they were in England at the
most solemn part of the service, when every body was
attentive. By the statute law the witnesses could nut be
prosecuted unless a clergyman in orders celebrated
the marriage, and consequently the people resorted to
persons who wrrej not authorised. New he proposed
that no marriage should legally take place, unless cele-
brated by the recogresed minister of religion ; and he
would say, that unless the parties chose to resort to the
clergyman they should go to the public register, where
competent persons should witness and legalize the act.
—(Hear, hear.) Now it had been objected to
him, that he proposed to make marriages valid
for a time, and then not so. He did not propose
anything so absurd. But in cyder to prevent such mar-
riages as those of Gretna-green, which were most objec-
tionable, he had proposed that the register c .uld nut
certify unless one of the parties was resident within the
district for a certain period of time. His object in ris-
ing was to move that the House do resolve itself
into a Committee for the consideration of the
subject this day three months. In the mean-
time, he would' give every possible consideration to
every fair and legitimate allegation:which could be urged
against him, he certainly: would not lend an attentive ear
to any clamour which might be ignorantly urged.
Mr. FORBES said that he would continue to object
to the Bill, and he was content to remain in the
class designated by the N. Lord as " unreasoning."
The people of Scotland objected to the Bill on account
of the stigma it would impose upon local schoolmeeters,
who would be prevented by this Bill from exercising
their functions. The people of Scotland objected to
this Bill also because it would in effect prevent the poor
man from being mantled according to the rites of the
national Church. He thought the clause which com-
peted the parties present at the death of an individual,
whether relatives, medical attendants, or any other per-
sons to give information of the event to the r, gister
was objectionable. These were some of the grounds on
which the people of Scotland petitioned against the Bill.
The motion was then agreed to.
PRISONS' BILL.

The adjourned debate on this Bill was postponed till
Thursday.
PRISONERS REMOVAL (IRELAND) BILL.
The House then went into Committee on this Bid, and
the clauses were agreed to without discussion.
On the motion for the poAponement of the
MIDLAND AND GREAT WES FERN OF IRE-
LAND RAILWAY .BILL,

T ord GEORtiE BENTINCK said that when this
Bill came b-fore the House, it was hi. intention to ca!l
the attention of the House to.ab the details of the Bill.
After a few words: from Mr. HUDSON,
Lord .JOHN RUSSELL said that it was his intention
to bring on the Bill.
STAGE CARRIAGES DUTIES BILL.
Mr. GREENE brought up the report on this Bill.
On the motion for the adjournment of the House,
Colonel SIB I'IIORI' begged to call the attention of
the Howie to the accidents that had occurred on the
London and North Weatern Railway. No less than
seventeen lives had been lost on railways during the last
fortnight, and he thought Governor, nt ought to adopt
some measure to prev..nt such loss of life.
Mr. HUDSON said that no person c,,uld regret
these accidents more than he did, and he would not
object to an inquiry bring instituted to investigate
the subject. Calainities of a similar character had
occurred by other means of conveyance than railways,
which it would be as well equally to investigate.
Nothing was more distressing to the directors of railway
companies than thl.so accidents, and he was sure, if the
astute mind of the Hon. and Gallant Colonel could sug-
!zest any means by which they could be prevented, they
would be only too tr,ppy to adopt them.
The House then adjourned at Half past Twelve o'clock.

RACES TO COME.

The following' is the list
the season of 1847:

of fixtures already made for

Hampton
Tenbury
Sutton Park l5
Bibury Club l6

'NE.
Stockbridge
Newcastle
Carlisle

Writtle
Newmarket
Lancaster
Mansfield

Liverpool ...
Nottingham
Good wood
Leominster
,lIST.

AUG

Ripon 2
Brighton ... 4
Ilorwich
Wolverhampton
Chelmsford
R,!aging ll
Lew es ll
Yarmouth

York

*Egharu
Derby
41-Ivreford ....•..••
*Huntingdon
*Canterbury
Stuurbridge

SEPTE:
Warwick
Knutsford
Aberdeen
Docca ter
Leicester
Lichfield

Stafford 5
Newmarket, S. 0 ll

NOVE'

Worcester . not fixed

[The meetings against
teri4t have not been
liability will take at thi

Curragh IRISH RAJK
June 22
Killarney 3O
The Heath July 5
Mallow
Down Royal Curpora-
_, _

tian
Carlow 9O
liallyei9•h 29
l'hce,ix Park Aug. I()
Kileuek Aug. 16
Cork Garrison

. 17
• 22
. 30

20
.. 27
~ 28

24
~ 24
~ 25
~ 26
~ 27
~ 30

~ 22
22
~ 22
~ 23
~ 28
~ 29

3

Tarporley
viiich we have placed an as
y announced, but in all pro
e time mentioned.]

-----
iS TO COME.
Curragh Sept. 7
Lusk
Limerick 2l
Ferm,iy
Nam
Cork Oct. 5
Curragh
Down loyal C...rpoi a-

•
19
Kiikeuuy 2l

RAILWAY COMMITT E ES.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.)

GROUP IV.

The Committee were engaged all day passing clauses in the
LONDON 'IND nLacicvtraLL IMPROVZ-
IVIENT,
and afterwards ad;ourned at four o'clock.