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

FEBRUARY 26 1851.

hal 'irritations for the Reform Bill, to' the repeal of the
conore es. and other great pelihcel meesures; but this
was the first :item that a society lied been established tor
the purpose of eisaegieg a law resembling that of the law
of tuarriege, aed teller, purely for the perpeses of per-
smell interest, a great effete, had been made to change
public opini•in upon such a :subject. He had no hesita-
tion is •aeiter, from the evidence which hail been laid
before him, that the agitation had been begun by those
who had violated the law, and had been carried on by
them in conjunction with those who had entered into
engagements which the law forbade. Let them see the
manner in which they had begun it. They began
by retaining counsel and solicitor:, by sending
lecotrers all over the cornett.), by writing
pamphlets, and by holding peblic ineetiegs, where their
advocates spike from the platform. The topic they
eommeeced with was the doctrine that, as the law then
steed, those merriages with a deceased wife's sister were
pesfectly lawful, and thus they gave occasion to in,teacss
of the commission of breaches of the law, and then they
brought forward these instances as reasons for a:tering
the law; and so posieively hal they affirmed that the law
of England allowed those marriages—although, as had
l,een well said, ever since Christianity had been first
plaetsti in England in the see ind century down to the
present time, they were forbidden—that the questien
was brought irate the courts cf law, and was solemnly
argued in the Court of Queen's Bench in the time of his
distinguished predecessor Lord Denman. The question
was raised on that occasion, whether those marriages
were lawful or void, Cud by the unanimous opinion of
the Court of Queen's Bench these marriages were de-
clared void and incestuous. Some allusion had been
made to a wish which had been expressed by a Learned
Judge for whom he entertained the most profound respect
as well as affection. That opinion, however, given by the
Learned Judge when at the bar, emflist the haste of
professional dut'es, and without having time to consider
the question fally, did net in any degree affect the ques-
tion; it only added to the weight of the contrary opi-
nion which that same Learned Judge had given upon
the bench when the case had been solemnly argued
before him by counsel on both sides; and so convincing
were the reasone given by the judges on the occasion he
bad referred to, that the promoters of the measure were
forced to bring the point before the final court of ap-
peal, tend it was from that moment allowed by them that
the law forbade these marriages, and that they could not
be legally solemnised without an alteration in the law.
What was their next proceeding? They stated that the
law prohibiting these marriages had been introduced by
Lord Lyndhurst's Act, and that that Act ought to be re-
pealed; and several petitions were presented praying for
its repeal, and they went about the country asserting
that until Lord Lyndhurst's Act passed these marriages
had been saectioned bylaw. The fact was that Lord
Lyndhurst's Act had made no alteration in the law;
it had only altered the mode of procedure by which
theft uulawful marriages were to be set aside. It had
been previously a great defect in the law of England
that marriages, however censurable on the ground of
incest, were not void.. If a man married his own sister
or mie her the marriage was not void—it stood good
until it was set aside by the decree of a competent
judge. Lord Lyudhut.st's Act very praperly enacted
that those marriages which heretofore were only voith
able should be void, as they had been before the Re-
, formation, and as they were now in Scotland. Lord
Lyedhurst introduced no now law, but improved the
mode of procedure—the manner in which the law was to
be in future enforced. Our ancestors had acted with
great wisdom when they dissented from the Church of
Rome, as had been stated by the Right Rsv. Prelate near
him. There was nothing in which the Church of Rome
hail to annoyed the people of this country by its usur•
petion of power in it than by its disturbance of the law
of marriage. It multiplied its prohibitory decrees as
regarded the law of marriage to such an extent that
nothing could be done without a dispensation from
R tme, and thus they added to the power and to the
wealth of their Church. At the Reformation,
however, the people of this country drew a distinct lice
of demarcation, indicating tile prohibited degrees, and
al the marriages beyond that line were regarded as
lawful, while those within it were declared unlawful.
Notwithstanding the citations which had been made from
law books by the Noble Earl, that was considered the
law of England from the time of Henry VIII to the
present time. There had been an attempt in the reign
of Charles 11. to allow those marriages, but they were
discountenanced by the judges, and Chief Justice
Vaughan, with the other judges, concurred in the con-
struction of the 324 Henry VIII., that those marriages
were illegal, and tke law continued so until the pre-
sent agitation; and he trusted their Lordships would
not now alter the law. If they said so by a large
majority of that House that agitation would soon die
away. Ile would merely say, that his humble opinion
on the subject entirely concurred. with that of the
Right Reverend Prelate, and ho had no difficulty
in saying that those marriages with a deceased
wife's sister were forbidden by the law of the land,
The Noble Vi•clunt who had last addressed their Lord-
ships seemed to him (Lord Campbell) to treat the sub-
ject as if it were one of a merely physical nature; jut it
was not simply a physical question—it was also a moral
and a social question; and the House was to consider
what was most conducive to the purity, the comfort, and
the happiness of domestic life.—(Hear, hear.) Would
the Noble Viscount say, then, that a stepfather might
marry a stepdaughter; that a step-son might marry a
stepmother? Would the Noble Viscount say that that
would conduce to the comfort and purity of domestic
life ?

• Lord GAGE—No, cert:lnly net.
, ford CAMPBELL--Where, then, was the line to be
drawn? Surely, by placing consanguiuity and affinity
upon the same footing,—(`leer, hear.) The Noble
i Viscount, also app ested to thisle that there was no dis-
tinction betwten the sister of the wife end any other
women; so that any connexion which took place between
he arid the husband ie the lifetime of the wife would be
nothing more than simple adultery; hot in opposition
to this view ef the matter the opinion of Lord Tnurlow
was that such. a connexion was d-cidedly incestueus.
And was it possible that they could have the
benefit of the lenity of domestic life unless inter-
course of this description was considered incestuous and
as contrary alike to the law of God and man? Ile be-
lieved not, and that it was wily by such a feeling being
iustilltd into the mind, and becoming a sort of instinct
with all who came under its operation, that the purity
and happiness of domestic life which we now enjoyed in
this country could be secured. With regard to the num-
ber of instances in which the law had been violated, he
(Lord Campbell) was of opinion that there bad been
much exaggeration. lie had already explained one
source of that violation, but there was another source
which also required notice. In the counties of Lancaster
and Stafford there were a good many persons of the Ru-
men Ca:holie, persuasion, and he remembered that some
time ago the then Bishop of Melipotamue, who had now
a more sounding title, and of whom he did not wish to
speak with the slight disrespect, stated what were the
doctrines and practice.; of his Church ; and he cer-
tainly said that in the R :men Catholic Church they
looked much less to the law of the land than to the
power of the clergy in enacting a law for themselves;
that since the Act of 1835 passed, making these mar-
riages read, although they could not among Roman
Catholics be celebrated without a dispensation, he had
repeatedly grentel dispensations; and that, atter the
dispensation had been graetod, no Roman Catholic
prie,t had power to refuse the performance of the rile.
Thus the law of the land was hero terain set aside,
and these marriages eneouragsd in direct violation of it.
Bat with regard to these marriages, which he callsd in-
cestuous, be held been assure I, ia the meat positive
manner by those who p assessed the best intormetion
upon the subject, that they were not more numerous than
instances of bigaray—an off :ace which he knew from
his own experience, both as counsel and as judge, was
common in every county in England.w-(Heer, hear.)
In no one country in Europe, however, was the marriage
tie regarded with such sacredness as in England. In
Protestant Germany, he was sorry to say, marriage con-
tinued only during convenience, and mein the most
frivolous pretext was put en end to. Anti in America
they allowed the dissolution of marriage in cases
which we in this country would not listen to fur
ore moment. Io England we acted upon the
sacred injunction that for adultery alone could mar-
riage be dissolved. The people of America having de-
parted from that sacred precept, the sanctity of the mar-
riage life had consequently been very much impaired ;
and he trusted, therefore, we should never seek in Berlin
or New Orleans•for an example of the institution of do-
mestic life.—(Hear, hear.) Scotland, he observed, was
to be excluded from the operation of the Bill. And
why ? Because the people of Scotland, with hardly a
single exception, looked upon these unions with abhor-
rence—(Heat, hear)—and they would have had great
ground indeed to complain if an attempt were again to
be made to include them within the operation of such a
law, because these marriages were in so many words
declared by the Confession of Faith to be contrary to
God's law, and the Confession of Faith was made part
of the law of Scotland by the Act of Parliament which
was still in force.—(Hear, hear.) Henceforth, too, if
this Bill became law, the marriage of a man with the
niece of his deceased wife would be legal. But what
were the arguments in favour of the niece becoming
the wife of her uncle ? Was she to take care of the
children ? Did dying wives recommend their nieces
as the future partners of their husbands ? And did
nieces, too, make the best step-mothers?—(A laugh.)
These were the most plausible arguments that had
been brought forward in support of the Bill; but none
of them had been applied to the marriage of the niece
with her uncle. It had been truly stated in the course
of the present debate, that the female sex were mach
alarmed upon this subject; and he believed if they were
polled throughout the country, ninety-nine out of every
hundred of them would petition against the measure;
and that purely on account of th© natural delicacy of the
female mind, and its intuitive perception of what was
just and modest.—(Hear, hear.) It was in open viola-
tion of the law that these marriages had been contracted
—knowingly, willingly, and contumaciously, for it was
nothing better, the parties to them had defied the law,
and their children were therefore illegitimate; and now
Parliament was called upon to say that these marriages
were valid. In cases were these marriages had been con-
tracted ignorantly the Legislature had interfered with
prepriety, but never yet had it been proposed to render
valid marriages which had been contracted in open vio-
lation of the law. If ever there were a case which de-
served commis,eratien, and where there might have
been an inclination to render valid a marriage of this
sort, it was that which had been decided at their Lord-
ships' bar. In that case the parties were openly. inno-
cently, and happily married, under Heaven's sanction,
and in the manner recognised by law. A lady of imma-
culate virtue was led to the altar by a prince of the
blood of this country—they believed, and many opinions
were given that that was a valid marriage by levy; but !
aEer considerable argument upon the subj!ct the House
came to the unanimous determination that the marriage
was void. He maintained that the argument that' the
proposed measure was one for the Li:flat of the poor

was utterly fallacious. It wag rot for the poor, but for
the rich. wh,) knew they hal vie!Atei the hlw.
th,reforo hepNl that the 3111 :yowl be at once r,,,j,eed
by ,tteh t tn,l)rity as would ttike assay all hope u, tho
8111 being ever p,:iserl,

The aish ,p of LONDON said, that he would not at
that lac hour adiresa their L •rdships but that a runa•ur
had got abroad that he had changi-d the opinion he had
expressed on the same subject 10 years ago, whi n a
measure of similar kind was brought forward by the
late L'ird \Vh ancliffe. His opinion had undergone a
change, but it was to the effect, that though he had then
expressed considerable doubt whether those marriages
were exp•essly prohibited by the Church. and though
he could no• say that his mind w.;.3 pellet:ly made up,
and that doubt entirely rernov,d, soil, having considered
the subj 'et muco, and road bath sidr a o! the cti. stuns, he
hid 1 daunt than fiatnerl, that the ,e marl iages wore
prohibited by the law of God. When his Right Rev,
Friend had ri fi'rred tf, the interpri Wiwi put by the
Jews on the chairer of Leviticus he would beg' to re-
mind him that they had now no means of ascertaining what
were the views or the Jews at the 'irate of our Saviuur as to
the prohibition of marriagrs; and that ft, marry centu-
ries past, he said it with great resi.e .1 fir the J,ws,
amongst whim a ere many excellent men, they took
their religion in m the Talmud, end not front the able.
As to the objection of his Itivolt Rev. Friend, !hat they
ought not by thy; it law to offi,ct the marriages it the
Jews, he replied to him, that they did no such thing, for
that it was the opini,n r.if Lord Stowell that their ecclesias-
tical cou is had nothing to do with the marriages of the
Jews. He reminded their Lordships of what -had hap-
pened in 1792 in France when the law of marriage was
altered. It was followed by great immorality, and the
state of France at present was not such as to induce
them to lo:sen the bonds of marriage. Many marriages
had taken place in d': fiance of the law. Of this there
could be no doubt, but the remedy was not to relax the
law, but to promote education and amid more clergy
amongst the people, and thus inculcate lessons of mora-
lity and a due obedience to the law. He believed this
relaxation was sought for in the large manufacturing
towns, and not iu the rural districts, where there never
had occurred but one instance of these prohibited mar-
riages, and that was in North Essex. He concluded by
referring to a petition from females against these mar.
riages.presented to the House of Corr awns, and declared
that the feelings of females were intensely opposed to
such marriages.

Lord BROUGHAM deemed it to be superflous to
address their Lordships at that hour. Upon the Scrip-
tural view of this subj,-ct he ventured to give no opini,n,
particularly as he found a discrepancy to exist amongst
the Right Rev. Prelates; but as to arguments of a social
description, he conceived they were more strongly
against such marriages than against those mentioned in
Scripture, that is, with a deceased brother's wife. By
the law of 1835—Lord Lypidhurst's law—a great and
glorious defect was cored; for it put an end to a most
absurd state of the law, by which marriages were said
to be voidable, but said not to be void until the sentence
of a court had so pronounced them, although they were,
in fact, void ab initio.—(Bear, hear.) The Noble and
Learned Lord c,included by expressing a hope that the
discussion whch had taken place would have. a most
beneficial effect.

The Earl of ESSEX was understood to ask the Noble
Earl (St. G,rmans) whether, during this inquiry he
had heard of any case of a sister marrying her brother-
?

Trio Earl of Sr. GERMANS said that the only ques-
tion which they had to consider then was, whether the
law should not be changed, so far as it declar,cl illegal
the marriage of a man with his deceased wile's sister.
The Bishop of OSSORY next addressed their Lord-
ships; but spoke in so low a tone as to render it impos-
sible for us to give even an outline of his arguments.
We understood him to say he thought that the neeessery
effect of such a measure as this passing into a law woual
be to endanger the morals of the country. That un-
suspected, trosusptcious, and warm intercourse that so
generally existed between G. e wile and her sisters would
altoge her cease it this Bill were passed, He hal always
thought that the relationship which existed between such
parties was one of the happiest features of our social
system. As Christian legislators they were bound to
consider what was said on the subject. in the Word of
God. On this subject Scriptural authority was dsmaneed
from those who were desirous of maintaintme the exist-
ing law. That challenge could not be answered without
reverting to controversial topics. He was of opinion that
there was to be found in the Word of God direct autho-
rity for the restrictions which existed in our law. It was
said that a min was made one with his wife—he was
therefore made the brother of her sister. The sense
of the manmamiments was not to be confined within
the literal cords of them, but was to be extended
to a class of actions of which the one forbidden might
be deemed the st mbol. Slavery had very generally ex-
isted before Christianity. It was, however, considered
that Christianity had performed its proper office by,
discouraging end abolishing it; and yet in the Scrip-
tures there was not to be found a single precept against
slavery. The Right Rev. Prelate was understood to
oppose the Bill.
The Earl of ST. GERMANS replied, and in retard
to some references which bad been made to Prussia,
quoted the following passage from the letter of Dr.
Helwig, Professor of the Philosophy of Law at the
University of Berlin, addressed to Privy Councillor
Dieterici—" President Strampf remarked that he was not
aware of there being a single case of affinity marriage
among all the classes in which a divorce was requested
during his office in the department of the Royal Court of
Judicature. He knows himself several unions of that
kind among his particular friends' trod acquaintance.
None of thc.e cen he call a bad or unhappy marriage;
they rather are, as fer as he knows, really happy, rind
indeed some are truly models." There might
evils attributable to the facility of obtaining eavorcee, but
that aas a different thing trem a facility of contracting
marriage.—(flear, hear.) Reterence had also been made
to the Greek Church; but a communion which prohibited
marriages to the SiT.ql or seventh degree, could hardly
be held up as an example. In Rus'ia, which had been
mentioned, these marriages. it between persons not be-
longing to the Greek Church, would he held valid; the
law was merely ecclesiastical, affecting the members of
that communion. As to the remark that the proposed
Bill woul A affect the canons of the Church, it might be
asked, in reply, whether the Act of 1835 did not do so?
and whether Right Rev. Prelates were not, nevertheless,
parties to passing it?—(Elear.) The clergymen of son-de
of the largest parishes in the metropolis and the coun-
try, iccluding the Rev. Dr. Hook, the vicar of Leeds,
had expressed their opinion that it was most desirable for
the comfort, especially of the poor man, and for the wel-
fare of his family, that a measure of this nature should
be adopted. He thought the Noble and Learned Lord
(Lord Campbell), in referring to soma of the legal cases
which had been quoted, had taken a view of them which
was calculated to produce an erroneous impression. He
(Earl St. Germans) had, however, the satisfaction of
stating that he had received a note from Lord Denman.
who was unable to attend, expressing his wish and desire
to vote in taveur of the Bill. Although that Noble and
Learned Lord felt bound to administer the law as he
found it, he considered that a change was desirable, and
he (the Earl of St. Germane) thought the opinion of the
Noble Lord would net he without its iefluotice upon the
House. Fortified in his views by these authorities, and
by the opinions which had been expressed in that House,
ho did not think he was showing any disrevpect to the
authority of she Church in persevering with the Bill.
Tiieir Lordships then divided, a hen there appeared,—
C intent ,„ 16
Nit content
TheTh ,MajorityHß oi
Bill
eo
3,veats eg
dic,:iui
et,ehttrelayseend reading... —34
lost.
e
rued
to Friday Qaarter-pait Twelve o'clock

ASSIZE' INTELLIGENCE.
NORTHP,RN ClRCUlT.—Carlisle. Feb. 24.
The commission for holding the uszliz s for this county
was opened here on Swurdey.
Their Lordships st at ten o'clock this morning.
On this oec tsion the usual cavalcade of the Sheriff
presented a different aspect to that which it ordinarily
assumes, the present Sheriff, Mr. George Head
Hrarl
(being a member of the Society of Friends), having seb
stituted for the ordinary javelins with which the sheriff's:
men are wont to awe the laity, keep the county's peace,
and protect the persons of my Lords the Judges, poles
with silvered knobs on the top of them. Probably jave-
lins look too warlike for men of peace to sanction. The
weapons substituted for them certainly had the eff,ct of
changing the processional pantomime by which my Lords
the Judges strike awe into the vulgar mind on their way
to the courts to execute justice ano administer the laws;
but if required, they would be quite as effectual for a
punch on the head as the javelins would be for a poke
in the ribs, and thus the county peace was peacefully
kept without the fracture of any conscientious scruples.
The calendar of prisoners is light. It contains a
charge against a woman of murdering her infant, and
another charge against another woman of attempting to
murder her child. There is a charge of rape, and a
charge of cutting and stabbing. The rest are ordinary
larcenies. In all there are 26 prisoners.
The cause list contains an entry of six causes, ono of
which, an action for false imprisonment, marked for a
special jury, is fixed for to-morrow.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice CRESSWELL.)
Henry Twaddle was charged on an indictment, found
at the last assizes, with wilful and corrupt perjury before
the justices sitting at quarter sessions at Carlisle, in Ja-
nuary, 1850.

Mr. James anti Mr. Bailey prosecuted; Mr. Overend
and Mr. Campbell Foster defended the prisoner.
It appeared that a brother of the prisoner, Joseph
Tweddle, bad had a child fathered upon him by one
Jane Davis before the magistrates sitting in petty ses-
sions at Brampton, in November, 1849, which he was
then ordered to support. Against that order Joseph
Tweddle appealed to the quarter sessions, held at Car-
lisle, in January, 1850; and, on that occasion, the pri-
soner, Henry Twaddle, was examined as a witness on the
part of his brother. Jane Davis, who at that time was
in the service of a farmer at Lincoln, named Ander-
son, having sworn that the child w"s begotten on
the night of the 14th of October, 1848, the prisoner
swore that on that night his brother was at a farm
called Crook•farm, with a girl named Jane Story, the
servant there, and that " be knew he was there," and
threw stones on the:roof of the. house to attract the far.
mar's attention, and
put a stick against the door. Fur-
ther to damage the credibility of Jat.o Davis, he thin
swore that he bad blin•Jelf been on t rms of impi of er
familiarity with her on the 26th or 27th of that Ocioi er.
For the prosecution Jatie Davis was called. who swore
that Joseph Tweddle was with her en the night of the
14th Of October, that he came there with two persons,
named Giiiiiiiellovv a d Forster, and 'hat they tett him
there. Fier s•i:.ter else swot.- she ivr Joseph Twedd e
that night, end corrouorated this sta•ement that it was
the 14,h of October. Jane Davis also swore sbe had
never been on terms of improper intimacy with the pri-
soner. Fur the defence, witnesses were called who
proved that the night Joseph Tweddle was at Ander-

----
son's farm with Forster and Goodfellow was the 21st 0
Ocrolie,., at.td Jane Story swore that she remEmber(d
'arint• s,nr. s•on,s thrown on the roof of
.41cr
l''.
ro,stt.r s house one night, in October, when joseph
l'wedtile was with her, and that night was the 14t12
o Outober; she kncw it because she had been talkirg
that night with her sister about its being exactly a
mouth
before iNlirtinm as. It was also shown that the prisoner
had visited Jlne Davis on two occasions, on one of which
he sat with her till half-past one in the morning', And
m
remained some time sine with her before be left. This,
the L. arned Counsel for the defence suggested,nst would
the
have been strongly corroborative evidence agai
prisoner had she chosen to father the child upon bin',
and it east qtrilly strongly corroborative of the probable
truth of the awful-tit that lie bad hal improper
rnacy with 11,,r on lbw occa.ion.
His LonDSHIP care;olly summed rip the whole facts to
the jury, tehing them that they must be satisfied not
Only ill:a the prisoner start d that which wai false, but
fo that he knew it to be fahe at the time, in order to
Jury, titer
find hint guiltv ; o.hertvis,., they must acquit him.
Thu • -
of Not Guilty.
The tr;al et' this cast, occupied nearly the whole dal.
a short absence, returned with a verdict
In the Ni:-j Pius Court the only case tried was dally
uninteretipg.

SHIP NE WS.
I, LivERPOOL, FEB. 25.—Wind E.S.E.--loconslent
.(31'CU, has arrived at Milford for Rio Grande; Elise
Ann, from Aberavon, has arrived at Holyhead tor this
port with damatze. Arrd. Jane Bird, from Consmati-
-11,-,P1,; Louis Philipp. from ameo; Commodore, from
Havre; Count Alexander Bramiski, from Odessa; from
ftßeroontn:
ti.l-"!yei;:diaffoyrocil;mastSt,slye:fefrrr:dza,pfartosmg,les;
Rouen; Charlotte, from Antwerp; Minerva. from °I.
ilorhicl'dngge'lterrb: fel.:l
bon; Premier, '
from Palermo. Slit. Robert Parker, for
Savannah; Edward O'Brien, for New Yorki D"ve'li
vannah; Petra, for Bilo Singapore;
il
Rio Janeiro; Thomas Fielden, for Calcutta; Cleuti's'
for Naples; Forest State, for Boston; Montrose, M. mil.
Primrose. .
for
a; —cella uee •
Orleans,
GRAVESEND, FEB. 25.—Wind E., light, fine.
Arrived—Willtana Crow, from St. Oslo; Joseph 45111
Ann, from Ostend; Kingston, from Antwr Thqeis:
fromtr Struer; Gonvorlo steam-frigate, from SerdiL:
from Krugeroa ; Vriendsclap,
ate' rd‘uitnma' t ra'
.orSailed—Mary Welch, for Genoa; Barbara, ,(31. • 51,
I__
iim..
ho ; , Azorian, Acis, and London Packet, for
m , ael s; Emerald, for Boulogne. NM AJo

SEA
[N signifies that the nt

by night—and Ai by

PLACES.

America (by Brit. pkt.) N
America (by U. s. pltt.) N,

America (by U S. pkt.) M
Atrica ( West coast).• N
Alexandria• . ....... N

Belgium •. .• N
Brazil .. . M
Buenos Ayres M
C alifornia( vi a Ch agres) M
Cape of Good Hope 2:
Constantinople* .. •• N
Central America ..
Channel Lies N'
Chili .. .. •MI