The Sun.
London, England, 1870-05-20 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, MAY 20, 1870.

IC I PERIAL PARLIAM ENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-THIIRSDAY.

The Lord Chancellor took the chair at five o'clock, at
which hour there was a very full attendance of peers. A
number of ladies being also present in the side galleries.

MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S
SISTER.

Lord HOUGHTON moved the second reading of the bill,the
object of which was to render valid marriage with a deceased
wife's sister. The noble lord referred at some length to
the endeavours that had been made to procure the passing
of a measure such as that now under consideration, and
the number of times the House of Commons had
given its assent to the principle of the bill. He
strongly urged their lordships to agree to the second
reading of the bill, and set at rest a matter that had
caused the greatest unhappiness to a large number of
Her Majesty's subjects. One great reason that ought to
induce their lordships to read the bill a second time was
that the present law was quite inopportune in preventing
these marriages taking place. It had been said that these
unions took place but rarely ; but if that was the case, he
knew that the unhappiness that was occasioned by the
present uncertain state of the law was the source of great
misery to thousands. He implored their :lordships
to read the bill a second time, and thus give comfort to
conscientious men, fair fame to honest women, and peace
and happiness to many a home.
The Duke of MARLBOROUGH, as an amendment, moved
that the bill be read a second time that day six months.
He denied that the law as it now stood rested upon the
doctrines of one persuasion which the Prime
Minister had declared ought not to be enforced upon
those who differed from it. He denied that it was
a doctrine peculiar to the Church of England.
It was based, as all the laws of England were, upon the
common principles of Christianity, and examining into
the social results that would follow, he trusted their
lordships would not sanction a breach of the mar-
riage tie, in order to bring this country into har-
mony with the disgraceful scandals and laxity
which prevailed in America and other countries.
If their lordships passed this bill it would bring down the
state of morality in the country, and therefore he hoped
they would not consent to read it a second time. •
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE, on the part of the Govern-
ment, supported the bill.
The Bishop of ELY opposed the bill. He believed the
immense majority of the women of the country objected to
its provisions, and he hoped their lordships would respect
their feelings. The bill dealt a death-blow at the purity
and sacredness of the homes of England, and if it became
law it would but produce discomfort, sorrow, and any-
thing but happiness.
The Earl of KIMBERLEY and the Bishop of RIPON sup-
ported the second reading. The right rev. prelate said
he could not, after the most patient consideration, come
to the conclusion that these marriages were prohibited by
Scripture ; on the contrary, he believed the word of God
allowed them. The right rev. prelate also read the opi-
nions of the late Dr. Dale, dean of Rochester ; Dr. Hook,
dean of Chichester ; Dr. Close, dean of Carlisle ; and Dr.
Champney, dean of Lichfield, each of whom expressed
the strongest opinion in favour of legalising the marriage
with a deceased wife's sister.

Lord LTVEDEN said he should give his vote against the
second reading of the bill, as he considered it a very im-
moral one.

The Bishop of LINCOLN strongly opposed the bill.
Lord WESTBURY, in an argumentative speech, inquired
into the religious reasons for the prohibition, which, he
contended, was one of ecclesiastical polity rather than a
Divine command, which the Church had always assumed
the power of dispensing with, and which the Legislature,
at the dictation of Henry VIII., had at one time declared
not to be the law of this country, and a few years after
had asserted that it was. He then proceeded to criticise
the arguments of the Bishops of Ely and Lincoln, and
insisted that the law as it stood was based upon an
erroneous interpretation of the Scripture, continued by a
spirit of bigotry, and framed in the utter violation of the
very spirit of civil and religious liberty.

The Bishop of PETERBOROUGH thanked the noble and
learned lord for the lecture he had given to them on
diffidence, while he was sorry he had not illustrated in his
own person and approached the subject with more learning,
if not with less levity. He contended that these mar-
riages of affinity were forbidden by the highest authority,
and if their lordships passed this bill they would establish
a most dangerous principle, which would, by the logic of
events, and the force of men's passions, result in the abo-
lition of the tables of affinity. He opposed the second
reading of the bill, and it seemed to be one that would be
likely to produce serious domestic evils to secure a very
doubtful gain.
After a lengthened debate, in which it was admitted by
all the speakers that the present could not be looked upon
as a party question, their lordships divided, when there
appeared—
For the second reading
Against it

. 77

Majority against the bill 4
Their lordships adjourned at twenty minutes to twelve.

HOUSE• OF COMMONS.-THURSDAY.

The Speaker took the chair at five minutes to four
o'clock.

The Sheriffs of London presented a petition from the
Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses.

NEW MEMBER

Mr. GREVILLE NUGENT took the oaths and his seat for
the county of Longford.

ARMY STORES.

Mr. MILLER asked the Secretary of State for War,
looking to the condition of some of the Admiralty stores,
as described in this house by the Secretary to the Ad
miralty, whether any inspection of the stores for the use
of the army had been made since he came to his present
office ; and, if so, when ; and whether he had any objection
to state generally the condition in which they have been
fonnd ; if not, whether it would not, in his opinion, be of
mportance to follow the example of the Admiralty and
have the army stores forthwith inspected, so that their
condition might be ascertained.
--Mr. CARDWELL said an inspection of the army stores
took. place at regularly fixed periods. The date of the
last inspection was March 31, 1870, on which occasion the
stores were found to be in a good condition, and fit for
immediate use. The greatest care was taken with the
purchase of stores, and with respect to any surplus the
precaution was taken not to press them for sale when a
fair price could not be realised.

That right hon. gentleman not rising, the noble lord
walked out of the House.

Mr. STANSFELD said the questions of the noble lord
were not easy to answer or easy to understand. He had
referred to the statement in question and the accounts,
and he could find no details to answer the noble lord's
question. There would, he considered, be no use in going
to the expense of printing the papers.