The Sun.
London, England, 1856-04-29 00:00:00

.4„
tco:44r.
'7 • -•
1414 A..
Atka*
• •
.• • 1.141..,,,414/.
•
fts,l re- -7 e.O .1 •
rrte - •!,)-
kr'
Fti . . •• , ~
eV" 11,,, -
.14
.e. -lA!x I 6'
_2O-fiab • iltd/T
'N•••L:44, - •4.

lel

[PAW& 4D. STAMPED SD.

the 'Rev„' J. C. Miller, Hon. Canon of Worcester, Surro-
gate, &c.
" I cannot perceive that it is forbiddensin the Word of God;
on the contrary, the limitation of Leviticus xviii. 18, seems to
Me to be a sanctioning to marry a sister of a wife when de-
ceased. lam decidedly of opinion that the present law,
while it may, partially, and very partially, affect the habits
'of society among the upper classes, will remove a barrier to
m rriago which now exists, but which I do not believe God
ever set up. ' It will prevent much immorality among the
'poor; relieve nutly aburdened conscience, and tend to the
increase of happiness amongst large numbers of our fellow-
countrYmen."=---Hon. and Right Rev. H. Montagu Villiers,
Bishop of Carlisle.
"I speak adv:sedly when I say that I come here prepared
toloffer my opinion that theologically it is correct that such
marriages should take place, and I see no ground whatsoever
•on account of which such marriages may not be legalised."—
:Evidence of Rev. J. Hatchard, Vicar of St. Andrew, Ply-
mouth.

" I think it a great evil to insist unon a rule in which no
sacred principle is involved, and which is found to be at vari-
ance with the feelings of large.) lasses of the community."—
Rev. Mr: Stainforth.

" The three points upon which the petition was especially
grounded were these first, that such marria7,e was not for-
bidden by the Word of God; second, that there was no con-
sangu nity or blood-relationship existing between the parties;
and third, that such a marriage was wholly unobjectionable
on moral considerations."—Speech of Rev. J. B. Owen, St.
John's Chapel, Bedford-row.
" I believe such marriages as you wish to make lawful are
already lawful, according to the letter and spirit of Holy
Scripture ; and I hope the civil and ecele,iastical law will
speedllY be made conformable to the Divine."—Rev. F Close,
Incumbent of Cheltenham.
My opinion of the law has long been, that it is impolitic
restric ion ."—Archdeacon of Derby.
." It appears to me, therefore that first, as Scripture shows
tbat ,there nothing immoral in stch a connexion, and
secondly, as it is that much-evil would bo prevented
-many poor children saved-from mitery and ruin, by having
•that•perstn,Over themigho, in a majority of instances, would
,•be file next best_subs,litnte for a mother—my own mind is led
to believe that the law of man ought to fa117,416,-.11.
with tho law of God."—Rev. Canon Chompneys.
" Has never bad occasion to observe, either in the middling
or poorer classes, any injury or immorality arising from such
marriages • never admonished any of those parties that they
were acting in breach of the Divine law, because never be-
lieved it. The great inducement to these marriages is, that
the parties have a better opportunity than is generally
afforded of being acquainted with each other's real character
and disposition."—Evidence of Rev. J. F. Denham, M.A.,
F.R.S., Rector of St. Mary-le-Strand.
" Most heartily do -I wish you success. I cannot believe,
as has been sometimes said, that it is unscriptural that a man
should marry his wife's sister. The law of man has made it
i sin ; but) ou cannot make the poor man believe that the law
of God does."—Rev. Mr. Drummond. _

" In verse 18, the prohibition is only against marrying the
wife's sister during the lifetime of the first wife, which of itself
implies the liberty to marry her sister after her death."—
Rev. Dr. Chalmers.
" Is the marriage of a widower with his wife's sister within
the prohibited degrees ?" In all frankness and honesty lam
obliged to auswer—No. It is interdicted neither by express
veto nor yc-t by implication. Canonical austerity is not to
be identified with moral purity or matrimonial fidelity."—
Rev. Dr. Eadie, Glasgow.
" Without pursuing the subject further, I shall give it as
my opinion that the marriage in question is not against either
nature or the law of God."--Rev. Thomas Blaney.
" That the enactments of the Levitical law are entirely
misinterpreted, when applied in condemnation of marriage
with a deceased wife's sister, was the decided judgment of Mr.
Wesley, the founder of our Societies ; and I believe that
similar views have since ben entertained by many of those
among us who have been led by circumstances carefUlly to
examine the matter, and whose competency to judge of such
a question has given great weight to their conclusion."—Rev.
Dr. Bunting, formerly President of the Wesleyan Conference.
The prohibitions of such marriages, is, in my judgment,
eanetioned neither by Scripture, nor by phySiology, nor by
expo liency."—Rev. H. Renton, Kelso, Scotland. '
There was no prohibition of the wife's sister, except
during the lifetime of the wife."—Rev. Professor Robinson,
New York.

" It is much to be wished that the wisdom of tho Legisla-
ture would interpose for the satisfaction of the subject, and
that the bishops, of whose liberal sentiments up n the matter
I have no doubt, would promote a measure, which - as it will
contribute to the happiness and security of many individualS,
so will not fail to reflect an honour on the Church as well as
the State."—Rev. Dr. Stennett, 1775.
" Are marriages of this description considered in Germany
to be at all contra bonos mores ?" " Not at all. So far from
being considered contra bones mores, the feeling of the peo-
ple oC Germany is undoubtedly in favour of such iurriages."
. . . "It frequently hoppers that a widower marries his de-
ceased wife's sister out of a pious and affectionate feeling for
his departed wife ; and the feelings of the women of Ger-
many are so strong in favour of such marriages, that it often
occurs that the last parting request by a wife ou her death-
bed to her husband is to marry her sister in case ho should
feel inclined to marry agaiu. This arises partly from affec-
tion for her surviving husband and relations, that he may
not become estranged from her connexions, and partly
from affection to her sister, and very frequently where
there are young children, for their sake." . . " Are
you are aware of any evil consequences from the •eelebration•
of marriages of this description?"- .." None whatever. I:have
spoken with several of my friends, and I have written to some
sithers„,asising them whether they are aware that this power
of dispensation is the cause of any mortalityin- families, and
their answer is, None whatever.' lam not at all aware of
any."—Evidence of A. Bach, Esq.
" I have never heard upon what principle of policy the law
was made prohibiting the marriage of a man with his wife's
sister, nor have I ever been able to conjecture any political
inconvenience that might have been found in such marriages,
or to conceive of any moral turpitude in them."—Dr. Benja-
min Franklin.
" Within tho meaning of Leviticus, and the constant prac-
tice of the commonwealth by the Jews, a man was prohibited
not to marry his wife's sister, only during her life; after he
might - so the text is. This perhaps is a knot not easily untied,
how the Levitical degrees are God's law in this kingdom, but
not as they were in the commonweath of Israel, when first
given."—Chief Justice Vaughan.
" In the Indies—if a husband has lost his wife, he does not
fail to marry her sister ; and this is extremely natural, for
his new consort becomes the mother of her sister's children,
and not a cruel stepmother."- Montesquieu.
" Nothing is more common in almost all the states of
America than second marriages of this scrt ; and, so far from
being doubtful as to their moral tendency, they are among us
deemed the very best sort of marriages. In my whole life,
I never heard the slightest suggestion against them, founded
on moral or domestic considerations."—Chief Justice Story.
" The very strongest reason for engaging in a second mar-
riage contract is, frequently, to provide a suitable female head
for a family of small children. In such cases, who is so likely
to exercise the requisite maternal care and affection as the
sister of a deceased mother? To prohibit a marriage under
such circumstances seems to me inhumau.—Hon. Judge
Mason, U.S.
" I believe all restrictions upsu the nuptial union, unless
founded upon the law of nature, or the express authority of
Scripture, unwise and unjust ; in neither of which sources
have I found this interdict of marriage with the sister of a
deceased wife."—John Quincy Adams, late President of the
United States.
" As far as I can judge, I do not believe one syllable of the
unlawfulness of this marriage under the Christian dispensa-
tion."—Chancellor Kent, New York,
" I have perused, with much pleasure, your letters on the
marriage of a man with the sister of a deceased wife, which
not only confirm me in the opinion which I had long enter-
tained, but must, methinks, satisfy every candid mind, that
there is not even a pretence for the assertion that such a
connexion is prohibited by the law of God." —Judge Living-
ston United States.
"It is not only not considered as prohibited, but it is dis-
tinctly understood to be permitted ; and on this point,
neither the Divine law, northe Rabbis, nor historical Juda-
ism, leave§ room for the least doubt." "In all the countries
of civilised Europe, where the law of the land offers no im-
pediment, marriages of widowers with their deceased wives'
sisters very frequently take place. From the experience
which I myself have had during the 20 years that I held the
Office of Chief Rabbi, in Oldenburg and Hanover, I can affirm
that the marriages in question were frequent, and that they
have almost invariably proved happy. Even here, in Eng-
land, prior do the passing of the Marriage Act of the sth and
6th Will. IV., such marriages frequently occurred."—Evi-
*deuce of DrAdler, the Chief Rabbi of the Jews in the
British. Empire.
" If the act has notoriously failed in its operation; if these
marriages, though discountenanced by the Legislature, have
become more numerous, not only among the lower classes, a
large proportion of whom must ever remain ignorant of the
existence of this and similar interference by law with freedom,
but among the cultivated, the thoughtful, the conscientious,
the exemplary ; if the stigma set by the law is not stamped
by the public opinion ;if offenders aro as well received as
before, and are even respected for acting on a just view of
Scriptural texts, perverted by erroneous interpretation ; in.
such case it will surely be more politic to make the law con-
sistent with reason, than to persevere in a fruitless endeavour
to bend reason to arbitrary law, to vex and persecute where
we cannot prevent to curse whom the Lord has list cursed,
and defy whom He has not defied.'"—The late Lord Chief
Justice Denman.
" The petition from the city of London, in favour ofs this
marriage, was signed by a large number of pcnrs)%
Deputy
among others, by the Lord Mayor, the Govern?ritiy LT_
GOvernor of the Bank of England, and a constd
enables 9 private
ber of tyre Directors of that establishmel
bankers, by the Chamberlain of the city o b.y. 237
and 61 ph y labs
merchants, 146 solicitors, 124 barristers,
and he could say
It was his good fortune to be acquaiuted.with a large number
of the persons who signed this petition ,
from his knowledge of their characte the
rs. that ir opinions
were entitled to the greatest weight and attent—Speech
of Lord Overstonc, 1851,
" Ho declared, most conscientiously, he could find no pro-
hibition of this marriage in the Holy Scriptures."—Speech of
Right Hon. Stuart Wortley, M.P., Recorder of London.
.‘ I shall endeavour to show that the marriages it is sought
to legalise are not forbidden by the Word of GOd.; that they
are not contrary to the law of nature ; and that they are not
inconsistent with the interests of society."—Speech of Earl
St. Gernms.
He was sincerely favourable to the object of the Mar-
riages Bill."—Speech of the Earl of Ellenborough.
In 1835 a most important statute was passed by that
House ruder somewhat peculiar circumstances, and he might
also say i.f haste and want of due deliberation, materially
affecting a portion of the marriage laws of this country. In
this case the voice of Heaven was silent, and that of man had
been given with a hesitation and confusion of utterance that
deprived it of its due authority."—Speech of Lord Francis
Egerton (now Earl of Ellesmere), in the House of Commons,
18 i 2.
" Those who call themselves the friends of civil and reli-

gious liberty ought to support a measure that sought to get
rid of one of the most serious interferences with social liberty
that existed under the English laws."—Swech of Viscount
Brackley.
" Se lug that it was not against the law of God—seeing the
great social evils which arose from the restriction, and believ-
ing that there was no comparison between the social advan-
tages and the social disadvantages arising from this cause, he
should give the measure his cheerful assent."—Specch of
Earl of Arundel and Surrey.
-" Socially speaking, if a ease was made out that morality
would be endangered by the bill, that would be a reason for
rejecting it; but he had not heard it established that such