The Sun.
London, England, 1851-08-25 00:00:00

~1~:~e~tz~m was

1• - -
LONDON MONDAY, AUGUST 25 1851

Among the measures that had been for some time
before the public, and which it was hoped would have
received a final set lenient during the late seesion of
Parliament, there was one that excited peculiar in-
t-rest among a large body of our fellowesuejects.
The :‘:arrilges Affinity Bill was indeed looked for-
ward to with intense anxiety by many families of
moral and religious habits, who were naturally de-
sirous that the existing restrictions on the most
sacred relationship of life should be removed, that so
rent a blot on the great principle of civil and religious
liberty should be erased from the national statute-
book. Many were actuated simply by a desire that
full justice should be rendered to all their fellow-sub-
jects—that none should be the victims of an unjust
end impolitic enactment, which bas never been and
never will be recognised, and which drives large classes
of persons into opfn and acknowledged disregard
of, and disobedience to, the law of the land. Tnere
ire others, however, to whom the question assumes
s more personal aspect—those who, believing that
•here was no divine or natural prohibition, entered
upon such alliances, and who now awaited with the
,nost earnest solicitude the passing of the measure
which would legalise their contracts, and legitimatise
heir innocent offspring.
They had at the beginning of the session but little
reason to fear that tbey-would be permitted to suffer
much longer under the " hope deferred that maketh
sick the heart." During the two preceding years
hey had been made the victims of procrastination,
ind the realization of their reasonable expectations
was retarded by the Fabian policy of their opponents.
In every stage of the proceedings they succeeded by
clear and decisive majorities in the Commons House
of Parliament. But the matter was so vexatiously
delayed, that only a few days remained at the close of
1849 before the Bill had reached the last stage of
its progress in the popular branch of the Legislature.
Under such circumstances it was necessarily, but
most reluctantly, withdrawn by the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman who had it in charge, and the interested par-
ties were compelled to remain for a further period in
a state of suspense and anxiety. They were sus-
eked, hosever, by the cheering prospects of a more
,uccest-ful campaign in the ensuieg year.
The measure was again brought forward in 1850,
sod under equally favourable auspices. The same
vexatious impediments and obstructions were opposed
st every stage of its progress, but with less eff-ct, for
!r, passed the Commons early in July, and was then
ror I he first time introduced to the Peers of the United
Kingdom. Here, however, unexpected obstacles
,rose. The Nob!e Earl by whom it was brought
forward, actuated no doubt by a proper discretion,
withdrew the Bill, in order that abundant time might
le afforded to their Lordships to consider the vatiou-
letails, and to remove any feeling of annoyance the,
night be entertained at the late period of the session
it which it was brought up from the Lo aer
['here was, however, no division that could indicate on
'hick side the majority would be arrayed.
This year the subject was first brought into the
[louse of Lords. The views and opinions of the
Commons hid been so clearly, distinctl3, and une
quivecally expressed on former occasions, that no
additional prestige could be conferred by its again
~sassing through that House. It was also certain that
-edious and protracted discus,ions would take place on
the vexata questio of the session, " the Ecclesiastical
Titles Assumption Bill." It was therefore judicious
to take the decision of their Lordships on the
principle of the measure. The second reading was
propose-d by the Earl of ST. GERMANS in a speech
of singular ability and moderation ; and the Noble
Earl was admirably sustained by Viscount GAGE, but
it met with a most violent opposition, in which, we
regret to say, several of the Bishops took a leading
part. Conspicuous among the party was HARRY of
Exeter, who made a long speech on the occasions
which has since appeared in the form of a pamphlet.
The result was that the Bill was rejected in a thin
[louse, and that it must, consequently, be again
brought forward in another year.
The matter has thus assumed a new aspect. There
has as yet been no actual collision between the
Houses, but it is certain that the just and salu-
tary measure, the propriety -and expediency of
which ,was affirmed by the representatives of the
people, has been rejected by a small party of
the hereditary legislators, aided and assisted by a
goodly array of lawn sleeves. It is now be

coming—nay, more—it is essential that every per-
son desirous of removing this disgrace from our
statute-book, of repealing the most grievous specime❑
of bigotry and intolerance still existing, should exert
himself strenuously and energetically, in order
that the matter may be placed in a true point of view,
and that the errors and misconceptions with which it

is surrounded may be removed. It was especially de-
sirable that the partial and erroneous assertions and
statements of Bishop PHILLPOTTS should be completely
hapansweredia o and disproved. For this purpose a fitting
c
hAs entered the arena, one who has already
distinguished himself it the inquiries on which the
report of the Royal Commissioners was f unded, and
the Right hey. Prelate will have but little cause to
congratulate himself on the manner in which he has
been dealt with by Air. CAmpBELL Sum(• To all

persons anxious to arrive at a correct conclwiun on
this important subject, we would earnestly commend
the admirable pamphlet,* above alluded to, in
which the inconsistencies, and what is far worse,
the rni.quotations of the Bishop are freely and un-
-Bpariugly exposed. Never was an unfortunate
delis Tient more fiercely tossed on the horns of a
literary dilemma than the 13ithop has been by Mr.
SLEIGH. The Learned Genthanan has seized on the',

alleged quotation from the works of Bishop JEREMY
Talmo; by which the Bishop of EXETER endea.
vowed erroneoutdy to convince their Lordships that
that venerable and respeci,ed Prelate was adverse to
such mirriages,
whereas the contrary was clearly

* " Marriage with a Dec, a,ed Sister. A
Letter to the Ettshoptti Lxpter."B W.Cam bell Sleigh,
EA., of the Middle Temple, Barrister-a -Law. Lon-
don: Ward audPawrnoater row; Eflutburgb: Ogle;
Qtassow; (kali% 1651; pp. 39.