The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-26 00:00:00

THE SUN,

tracted had been declared valid. The Right Rev. Pre-
late near him (the Bishop of Exeter), in presenting a
petition against the Bill then before their Lordships, had
called it.a measure for legalising incestuous marriages.
But in so doing the Right Rev. Prelate had as-
sumed the very point in dispute. The supporters
of the Bill contended that those marriages were
not incestuous. The Right Reverend Prelate
knew, however, that by the use of that term he might
damage the cause of his opponents. But he should like
to know whether the Right Re.V. Prelate had supported
the Act of Lord Lyndhurst, for if he had he must have
sanctioned connexions which ho at preseat called inces-
tuous. The Noble Earl then proceeded to refer to a
speech of Lord Ellesmere's in reference to this subject.
The main object of the statute, the Noble Lord had
said, was retrospective, and it was intended to be in con-
firmation of a certain class of marriages which took
place within forbidden degrees and which were not void,
but voidable by certain proceedings in the ecclesiastical
courts. By the 9th canon of the Church people were re•
quired to refrain from contracting these marriages at
all. " All marriages so made," said the canon, " and so
contracted shall be adjudged incestuous an(?. unlawful,
and such marriages shall be deemed wrong from the be-
ginning." And yet these marriages, so pronounced by
the canon law, were bound by the Right Rev. Prelate and
that House in the bonds of indissoluble union.—(Hear,
hear.) " The inconsistenc:es of the law were fzlt by
runny individuals and many Hon. Members on former

occasions; and the difficulties to be mot with were also
folly appreciated. And he thought that certain agree-
ments had been made with regard to that measure, and
concessions yielded in consequence of the lateness of the
period at which it had been introduced, and it had been
distinctly understood that those who consented to the
measure did not do so finally, but as affirming the propo-
sition that it was a subject which called for some further
inquiry on a future occasion." We bad now in this
country a considerable number of marriages which were
invalid in consequence of the state of the law. He (the
Earl of St. Germans) had in his possession a consider-
able number of letters written by parties who were inte-
rested in that question, and addressed to various indivi-
duals. There was ene from a person to a Right Rev.
Prelate, the Bishop of Lincoln (as was understood),
expressing a strong wish that marriages with a deceased
'wife's sister might not be prohibited. He believed the
parochial clergy all through the country were inimical to
the state of the law, the evils of which they knew. When
parties went to them to be married under such peculiar
.circumstances, they, of course, explained to them that
they could not officiate, and that their union would be
illegal. The parties then, perhaps, sought other clergy-
men, and either got married by them, or were now liv-
ing in a state of concubinage. There were several emi-
nent men who understood the question as well as any of
their Lordships, who were of opinion that the practical
working of that law was deserving of the most important
and serious consideration. His Noble Friend (Lord
Wharncliffe) had brought forward a measure on that
subject; so had his Noble Friend Lord Ellesmere. his
Noble Friends, however, had not succeeded. In the
meanwhile a commission had been appointed, composed
of several very distinguished men—some of them mem-
bers of that right reverend bench—for instance the Bishop
of Lichfield, Mr. Stuart Wortley, Mr. Blake, en Irish
gentleman of considerable legal acumen, and Mr. Ru-
therford, a most able Scotch lawyer. When Lord
Wharncliffe had first brought in that measure, his
Right Honourable Friend had been opposed to it; yet
so convinced had he afterwards become of its salutary
results—as soon as he had given it some consi-
deration, he had brought forward such a measure him-
self. The Noble Earl then proceeded to refer to the re-
port of the Commissioners. They had not made any
distinct recommendation to Parliament on the subject,
but they had decided on the nature of the measure which
they thought ought to be brought in. They had exa-
mined a great number of witnesses, men in various
classes of life, and entertaining various opinions, and
the general bias had been in favour of that measure. In
America also two of the moat eminent judges, Chancellor
Kent and Judge Strong, were in favour of the principle
of such marriages, which in America it appeared were
considered the best kind of marriages which could take
place. Lord Wharncliffe and Lord Ellesmere and Mr.
Stuart Wortley were not men that were fond of inno-
vation, or who would introduce measures of change
without good reason. Mr. Stuart Wortley had
brought in his Bill in 1841, and had a majority
of 34 on the second reading, and in the last session,
when introduced, the majority had increased to 54.--
(Flear.) It had been found that no less than 294 Members
of the House of Commons were in favour of the proposed
measure, and recorded their opinions for it, while only 223
were against it. A law like that was in force in every
Protestant state in Europe, except in a few of the can-
tons of Switzerland (as the Noble Earl was understood).
In the Church of Rome it was not said that these mar-
riages were prohibited by the law of God, but was al-
leged they were forbidden by the laws of the Church.
But dispensations ware granted to those seeking them,
and those were considered sufficient to render them good.
Some reference had been made to the regulations ot the
Greek Church in this respect, and several gentlemen had
been examined before the Commission, and had put in
papers and documents on the subject. However, it did
not appear from any of the evidence that the Greek
Church considered marriages with the sister of a de-
ceased wile as forbidden by the Bible.—(Hear, hear.)
Some doubt had b.ken thrown on the statements made
with regard to some of the City parishes on that ques-
tion. Now, it appeared that in the pariah of St.
MrtriTchrot, no f.awe u than UR nagoa hq3 hoar. at.w)o.rect.
These cases consisted chiefly of the smaller class ot
tradesmen, and some of the labouring population also.
All these parties considered they were justly married in
the sight of God, and that the law of man did not pro-
hibit it. Marriages of that sort, also, within eight miles
of the General Post-office, had been discovered to exist
in the following numbers : In Ltuniseth, 11; in the
Borough, 72 ; ill St, Geerge's-in-tho-Es,st, 25; in
Westminster, 29; in Walworth, 12; in Deptford, 10;
in Woolwich, 15. It would appear that such marriages
had increased very ranch between 1835 and 1840, and
between 1845 and 1850, as various statistical documents
to which he referred showed. ' They had, then, no
less than 120,000 petitioners in favour of that Bill.
No less than 150,000 had applied to the House of
Commons. He might be told that those who know-
ingly violated the law had no right to come to the
Legislatuie tb ask for reli!f; but there were a great many
persons who- did not think that the marriages were
prohibited- by the law of God, and therefore not by the
laws of man. There ware massy persons who were now
living in a State of illicit intercourse in the eyes of the
law, who would desire no better than to be married in
the face of the Church. They had heard of cases where
the sister would not take charge of the deceased's sister's
children, nor live in the house with the widowed brother-
in-law. If a man W 35 so 'proflikate as to look at his
sister-in-law as a future wife no law they could enact
would make him a better rnan.--(llear.) He agreed
with the Right Rev. Prelate that if parties were living
together and able to marry, but did not, there was fair
ground for supposing they did not want to marry. For
his own part he had conceived that the functions of the
deceased mother could ever be best dischs.rged towards
the children by her sister; but no system of legislation
could ever compel people of diffsrent degri es and tempe-
raments, ages end condi:ions, to unite themselves against
their own will. And there would always be obj. Gaon-
able marriages, but that was no reason that these mar-
riages they were discussing should be dhatountenaneed
unless they were told they were forbidden by the I siv
of nature, or inconsistent with the best interests of so-
ciety; and until that was done the burden of the proof
lay upon them (the opponents of the measure). They
had no right to have a law productive of so much un-
happiness and general disregard of their enactments.
He had shown them that the law wasdneffectual. At the
presort moment great doubts existed as to marriages
which were contracted abroad. He asked them to con-
sider in what light those marriages were loeked upon by
the world. He would call their attention to a case in
which most respectable parties were concerned. The
names and particulars of the case had been published al-
ready, and so he did not think he committed a breach of
decorum in mentioning it. He meant the base of one of
the brothers of Lord Marcus Hill. The latter had been ex-
amined, and gave testimony to the following effect:—His
brother had been received into society in the same man-
ner after as before the event alluded to; and that
indeed he and his wife had been visited by Lord Win-
chilsea and all the most distinguished and respectable
people in their neighbourhood, who had expressed their
strong approbation of their marriage. He (the. Earl' of
St. Germans) would ask their Lordships, would Lord
Winchilsea be likely to have associated with parties
living in a state of coucabivage—or whether he did not
consider the marriage between Lord Claude and Lady
Hill as valid and good? In conclusion, he would call
upon their Lordships to reflect upon the awful responsi-
bility which they incurred in maintaining that law, be-
cause these marriages, he believed, to be sanctioned, not
prohibited, by the law of God; they therefore incurred
the awful responsibility of patting asunder those whom
God had joined together.—(Hear, hear.) He called
upon them, if they were satisfied—if there was a doubt
on the subject, to give that House a further opportunity
of considering that very important question which he
had then so imperfectly endeavoured to bring before
them.—(Hear.)
Tho Archbishop of CANTERBURY rose with much
reluctance to address their Lordships on a subject on
which be had far rather remain silent, and which he re-
gretted should ever have been brought before their
Lordships for discussion. Not that he had any' doubt
on the line which ho should take or the opinion which
he should maintain; but it was painful to differ from the
sentiments of many excellent men—painful to oppose the
Noble Earl, who had introduced this subject with so
much research and so much moderation, and painful to
do violence to the interests and warm affections which
were engaged on what be must be allowed to think the
side of error. But ho had a duty to perform, which ho
must not hesitate to fulfil. It would not, however, be
necessary to trouble their Lordships at any length; the
argument on which he relied, and on which he grounded
his opinion, lay in a small compass ; in fact, he con-
sidered that the question at issue had been decided for
them, being already settled by the lattof God.--(Hear,
hear.) And surely it was no slight advantage that ;t
should be so settled, and that on a subject involving so
many
subject interests,
r ests
marriage,a d exciting such strong feelings, as the
a line should be drawn for us be-
yond which we must not deviate. 'ln a kindred sub-
ject, likewise relating to marriage, we had a like afiveo-
tage;—in the case of divorce how many vague reasor-
ings and conjectural arguments were silenced at once by
the single sentence of the divine law, which declared the
marriage tie to be indissoluble, except only in the case of
unfaithfulness? And so, on the question before them, it
was highly expedient that they should be told by au-
thority. which could not err where the conjugal relation-
ship might and might not exist, where the ties of affinity
and consanguinity began. This he considered to be law
down in the 18th chapter of Leviticus. The chapter
began by condemning the practices or the nations by
which the Israelites were surrounded, as displeasing to