The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-10 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, June 9.
Their Lordships met this evening shortly before Five
o'clock.

ROYAL ASSENT.
The Royal Assent was given to-day, by commission,
to the following Public and Private Bills :
Tobago Relief and Immigration into British Guiana and

Trinidad Bill.
The Indemnity Bill.
The Removal of Aliens Bill.

Insolvent Debtors' (India) Bill.
National Monument of Scotland Amendment Bill.

Clifton Bridge Bill.
Leicester Navigation Bill.
Folkestone Waterworks Bill.
Lambeth Waterworks Bill.

Stirling Waterworks Bill.
Birkenhead Dock Company Bill.
Morley Gas-light Bill.
Bristol and Clifton Gas Amendment Bill.

Southampton Gas and Coke Bill.
Worcester New Gas Bill.
Shrewsbury Market Bill.
Magdalen Hospital Act Amendment Bill.
Sufferance Wharves, &c. (Southwark) Bill.
Leicestershire Lunatic Asylum Bill.
Liverpool Docks Bill.
Dover Landing Pier Bill.
Manchester General Cemetery Bil'.
Price's Patent Candle Company Bill.
Leishman's Estate Bill.
Maxwell's Restitution Bill

Heneage's. Divorce Bill.
The Lord Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor,
Lord Campbell, and the Earl of Shaftesbury.
Their Lordships resumed shortly after Five o'clock.
The Earl of EGLINTON presented several petitions
against the Scotch Registration Bill; also a petition
from Glasgow against the repeal of the navigation-laws.
The Earl of GALLOWAY presented several petitions
against thel Diplomatic Relations with Rome Bill; also
a petition from the General Assembly of the Church of
Scotland against the Scotch Registration Bill.
SPANISH PENSIONERS.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY complained that
the return for which he had moved, of the Spanish
pensioners on the English Government, did not furnish
the information which he required, and that there were
several persons on the list who had no claim whatever
to receive any pensions from the English Government,
and he wished to know who had given these pensions to
these unworthy individuals, and for what cervices these
pensions had been granted.
Lord MONTEAGLE said that the Government with
which he had been connected had invariably confided in
the Horse Guards with regard to the persons on this
list. He objected to the production of the names as in-
sulting to the objects of the public charity. These were
not pensions granted by the Crown; they were charities
annually voted by Parliament.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said his Noble Friend
(the Marquis of Londonderry) was entirely mistaken.
This was a private charity, and had always been ad-
ministered in the spirit of the original grant, which was
charity, and charity only.
After a few words from the Earl of MINTO, the sub-
ject dropped.
Earl FITZ WILLIAM gave notice that on Monday,
the 19th inst., he should bring the present condition of
Ireland under their Lordships' notice.
PETITIONS.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH presented several peti-
tions against the Scottish Births, Deaths, and Marriages
Registration Bill.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented several petitions
with a similar prayer.
PENINSULAR MEDALS.
The NOBLE Dui then asked why the Peninsular
medals had not been yet distributed?
Earl GREY said it was a work of great labour and of
great time to engrave the name of each person and of
each action upon every one of these medals. Be had
seen Mr. Wyon on the subject, and he believed that the
distribution would soon take place.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY objected to this
system of ex post facto rewards, which he designated as a
prostitution o: orders.
The Duke of RICHMOND protested warmly against
this attack on those who had shed their best blood in de-
fence of their country, whose valour had procured
decorations for those who now complained that decora-
tions were prostituted by being bestowed on those who
had shed their blood in defence of their country.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he had ap-
plied the term prostitution to the new arrangements un-
der the civil order only.
REGISTERING BIRTHS, &c. (SCOTLAND) AND
MARLZIAGE (SCOTLAND) BILLS.
Lord CAMPBELL hoped the House would not re-
fuse to enter upon a consideration of these two Bills,
which involved no political or party question, and were
intended simply for the social improvement of Scotland.
The first of these Bills had reference to the registration
of births, deaths, and marriages. As the law now stood
there was no register of births, there was only a register
of baptisms of those who were within the pale of the
Established Church. The register of marriages was still
more detective; and, with regard to deaths, it was not
compulsory to make any entry of deaths or burials. Now,
he proposed to assimilate the law of Scotland to that of
England, and to make the registry of births, deaths, and
marriages compulsory. The expense he proposed to pro-
vide for by an assessment, which would be very trifling
in amount. He believed that all the opposition to the
Bill came from interested parties—the sessions clerks—
who would not, as he believed, be injured at all, for the
registration, as now carried on by them, of baptisms,
&c., would not be interfered with. The object of the
second Bill was to amend the law relating to marriages
in Scotland. Anything more defective than the law as
it existed in this respect could not well be imagined.
There were several ways by which marriages migt be
contracted in Scotland—first, by the marriage ceremony
performed by a minister of the church; secondly, with-
out any minister or ceremony whatever, but simply by
an acknowledgment before witnesses that the parties
were man and wife; thirdly, by a promise proved. And
there was yet another mode—viz., if the conduct of the
parties was such as to lead to the supposition that
they , were married the law assumed them to be
so. These various kinds of marriages might be
proved at any time, and by any evidence ; and
there were many instances in which marriages were de-
clared to be invalid in consequence of some proof being
afterwards produced that one or other of the parties had
been married before in one of the doubtful and objection-
able modes he bad mentioned, and that the first husband
or wife was living at the time of the second marriage.
This was a state of the law which occasioned great un-
certainty and great evil. He proposed by his Bill that
marriages be contracted in Scotland for the future only
in one of two ways, viz., in the church by the marriage
ceremony performed by a clergyman, or before a public
functionary to be called a registrar. He had inserted a
provision to guard against clandestine marriages—that
no marriage should be solemnized, unless one or other
of the contracting parties had resided in the parish for
fourteen days preceding. It had been suggested that
these Bills should be referred to a Select Committee.
To that course he had no objection, and would, there-
fore, move that they be read a second time and com-
mitted to a Select Committee.
Lord BROUGHAM seconded the motion, and ob-
served that nothing could be more unsatisfactory or
uncertain than the present law relating to marriages in
Scotland .
The Earl of SELKIRK, in order to enter his protest
Mlnst the second reading of the Registration Bill on
ournals, would move that it be read a second time
that day six monehs ; but he did not propose to give the
House the trouble to divide. He objected to the Bill,
because he believed the object might be attained by
means of the existing parish register, without all the
cumbrous machinery it was proposed to bring into ac-
tion, and the consequent expense to the country. The
poor-rates had been increasing in Scotland for some

time past in a ratio they could have no conception of;
and were still increasing ; and it was especially the
duty of Parliament, at a time when the people were al-
ready overburdened, not to throw upon them any addi-
tional impost. He also objected to the Bill, as imposing
penalties for not doing that which in many cases it would
be impossible to do.
The Earl of EGLINTON, while admitting that the
present system of registration of births, deaths, and
marriages in Scotland required amendment, objected
altogether to the principle on which this Bill proceeded.
His first objection was, the large amount of patronage
which would be craated by the measure—the number of
new offices, he believed, would be not fewer than 2,000.
He believed that the existing machinery, with some
slight alterations, and the assistance of a few additional
clerks, would be found sufficient for all the purposes re-
quired. Then there were many clauses of the Bill alto-
gether impracticable. With reference to the Marriage
Bill he did not object to the principle, but there were
many details which would require alteration in Com-
mittee, and therefore he should reserve his right to vote
against the third reading, should such alterations not
be made.
The Earl of ABERDEEN said that, in his opinion,
the two measures before the House had no necessary
connexion. A complete system of registration would
be most desirable, and alterations in the marriage law
might also be necessary; but that was no reason why
their Lordships should mix up two such distinct ques-
tions in one act of legislation. He thought that the
'setter course would be to proceed with the Registration
of Births Bill at once, and to postpone the Marriage
Bill for fare consideration.

The Duke of ARGYLE objected to the Registration
Bill on account of its centralising character. He feared
that its operation would be to destroy local control
altogether. He also objected to the principle of rating
by means of an addition to the poor-rate. In his
opinion that fund, which of all others should be kept
distinct, and applied only to its specific purpose, was a
tax raised from the wealth and industry of the country
for the support of the poor and helpless.
The Duke of MONTROSE said that the clergy of
Scotland had great apprehensions that the effect of the
Marriage Bill would be to produce great annoyance
amongst the people on account of the double fee which it
required on the solemnization of marriage. He thought
that in cases where marriage had been previously solem-
nized by a clergyman, the registrar should not be en-
titled to any fee. He objected generally to the compul-
sory character which pervaded the whole Bill.
After a few words from Lord WHARNCLIFFE,
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH did not wish to be un-
derstood as giving an unqualified consent to the Bills
before the House. He quite agreed with his Noble
Friend (the Earl of Aberdeen) in thinking that there
was no necessary connection between the Registration
and Marriage Bills.
The Marquis of BREADALBANE supported the
Bills, and stated that they were generally approved of
in the part of Scotland with which he was connected.
After an observation from the Earl of MINI°, the