The Sun.
London, England, 1858-07-24 00:00:00

,
-I • . _ . . ,__ _- _ _ . .
...
-....- -- :. -'7 -- ---...., _ .
..,..,
_. ~., . ,
..-'..:,,,,, - '..7,.:-....'-:-. -.;,,,....;•2*.7.;=.7c. ,-:-,t, .;',7'irei:..,""-i... '‘..'. -'. '..'''... r'--:_,z7-I;is,
• ,--, . -....,.. ~..--:,-.46.44616,v4-..........., . --, -- . ____ ... - ___,,_ ... __ ..,
.1.44-,..M.;:-....;;;..:....:,.'_:...--- .-41,17:;.,;`,,,,',..,,-.'.`;',,,..1:::., .
____ ' •.!-''--- -..;_____ ..4..,_,,.,,...,_2-:... . . IL;
__,,,
- _
•
..
. , .

--,
CE.

pro•

SHAE.E. MARKETS (This Day).

1g is
, the
rd of

a the
by
hem•
itary

RAILWAYS.

Molting ?rice
this day

6f - 6

.

7.1

Pt' "i
r

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE
.1;31F LORDS. -(YESTERDAY.)
ROYAL COMMISSION.

7i - 84
66 - 63
11 - 12

261 - 27,
89 - 91.
76 - 77
38 - 40

••• ... ••
4 - • 5

if - 84
16 - 17
61 -62 A
45 - 47
30 - 32

14i -- 15,
90 -- 92

......"
••I

10141-

631 - 634
251 -25 i

90 - 92
- 10
1011 - 1025
82 - 84
131 - 1331
102 - 104
-49 t
56 - 58

87 90
113 1242
111 123;-
9 —91 i
1 d
1— I a

•••

5i - 6

109 - 110
914 - 92
li - 11
94 - 95

35i 36.
2 ld
924 92:
64 • 66

60 - 62
3i - 3
-

91 - 92
2 - 1
46 - 47
72 - 73
96 - 98

.37 ar
Wool-

•
fiele
ens"

RA - 4,1
7, - I 3
8 - 9

27 - 29

;tali?
eld 1°
iptal°

inner
Fester;
h, and
icnci
e to
ion in

Business done
this day.

774 7

4Q 9

92i i

911 1
46 i

all
all
all
6
100
100

100
all
all
all

sal l
all
all
100
100

Blyth and Tyne 10 p.
c.pref.(issd.at 501.)
Brig. & Es. 4 P.C. St.
Do. 4 per c. Shares..
Caledn. £lO 4. p. c.
Ches. dr Ho. 5. p.c.
Do. do. 5 per cent...
Cork&Bandonsip.c.
,Dun.Perth.kAber.J.
E. Anglian Cls. A Sh.

St.
126
12i
St.

••• •••
7 - 4

48 - 50
93 - 95

LOI - vii

109 - 111
26,1 -26 i
81 - 83
44 - 46
3 - 2
34 -
87i -68 i
79 - 80
14 - 15
6 - 4
9 - 11
- 35

LT 9th
r / „ t,5
>nie,'
I, 04

97 - 99

le A
led bY
BOP'
.ted 131

all
all
all
1100
IWO

• .
•• - ••
51 - 6

IDo. do. B 6p. C.,

iDo. do. Cls. C 7 P. c.l
Eas.Co.E.x,sp.eNo.l
Do. No. 2
Do. New 6 pr. c. St
East Tin.' G. 6 p. c.
Do. 51., 10 per cent.
Do. 101. Debentr.Sh,
Do. do. 4 per cent 1
East Lancash.6p.cts
E.&W. York. J. stlp
Edin. & Gl. 5 p. c. Sh.
Ed.Prth.&Dun.4p.c.
'Furness, 5 p. c .....
Glas, & 5.W.G.5 p.c
Groat Northn, 5 p.c
Do. 5 p. c. Redeem
at 10 p. c. prem
Do. 4i per cent
Do. 5 p.c., Red. at 5
p. c. prom.
Gt.N. ofScot.l.st Pr(
Gt, S & W. (Ireland)
Do. 4 per c. Pref. St.
Gt. W. (B. &11. Ex..?spc
IDo, con. red. 4i p. c.
IDo. con. red. 4 p. c.
Do, irred. 4 per nnt.
Do. 5 p. c, red. pref.
Do, Birm. Pref. Sh
Do. Chester Sp. o. P. S
Do. do. 5 p. c. do
Do, Birm. Gua. Stk
Do, Mesh. Gua. Sh
Do, do, do.
Do. do. do.
Lan, & York. 6 pc. St.
Lon. &B. G. 5 pc. No 1
Do. , P., 5 p, c. St. N 0.2
I Do. New Guar. 6p. c.
Do. do. 5 p. c., N 0.4
Lon. & N.W., Coy. &
Nuneaton 5 r. ct...
Lon. & S. NV. 7 per ct.

110 • 115
103 103
115 - 118
115 - 117
132 - 134
79 - 81

63 -- 66

1119 - 121

112 - 114
105 - 107

65 - t 7
11 - 13.4

90
81 -- 83
82 -- 84
-- 98
9 -- 10
16 -- 17
9i -- lni
72 -- 74
18 -- 19
9 -- 91
13i --
1 40 -- 142

late 3d Shares
Loudy.& Color. Sh
Londy.&Ennis. Sh.
)41., S.,&L. 6 p....
Do. do. do. £6 Cent.
Do. do. 34 per cent.
I`.larypt. &Carl. 4 p.c.
Do. 4i per cent
Do. do.
Consol. 6 p. c. St.
Da.Con.Br.l3ir.6 p.c.
Do. 44 p. c. Pref. St.
Do. L. &11. Pref. St.'
New., Aber., &c., pr
5 p.c.red. 5 la. c.
Do. Perpet. U pr. et.
gorfk.Deb.4 p.c. Sh.
Do. 5 p. c. Ext. 1840,,
Do. 54 p.c. pf 1817.
Do. Wv. V.sp.
North British

1160 - 185

122 - 124

i -
68 - 70

St.
lul
12t
St.
St.

139 - 141
102 - 101
92 - 94

Do. 71. Vreference
N. E. Berw. 4 p. c.
Do. do. do
!Do. Leeds 6 pe. No. 1
;Do. do. Qrs., 1848
Do. York 11. & S. Pur
(North Staffordshire
Ox., Wor. & Wolv. 6
p.c., let guar.
Do. 6 p. c. 2d guar._
Do. do. Debeatr. St.
Scot. Ceut.Ncw Pref
Sc.N.E.Alßer.g.6p.c.
Do. do. 7 p.c. pf. St.
Do. d 0.3 p.c. pf. St
South Devon
Do. fixed 4A pr cent
S. Eastern (Reading
Ann.) of £1 Os. 6d
Do, 4A per cent
Do. Fixed 4A p.c. Sh
Do. New 4A pr. cent
IS. Wales Gua. 4 p. 0
i Do. do. 4i p. c .
'S.Yorksh.4 p.c.Guar.
Stock. &Dar., sp. c.
Do, do. do.
lVatorfd&liilk. 6 pc.

••• -
i•
114 - i
8i - 9i

Dios Ili

97 99
i }a

2i - 34
64 -

1001

1151 16

123
25
20
St.

St.
St.
st.
St.

BRITISH POSSESSIONS.

Atian. and St. La.w.
Bombay, Baroda, and
Cen. I nd, guar. 5 p. c.
Do.
Do. Additional A
Buffalo & Lake Ilur.
Buff.' Brut& Godch.
6 p.c.bds., 1 Aug.,'7l.
Do. do., 1 July, '7:-;
Do. do., 1 June, '74
Calcutta and S. East.
Central Oude (Lim
Ceylon A shares
Demerara .
Eastern Bengal
East Indian
Do. C Shares
Do. E. do. ........
D 0.4 p.c.Bnds.,'st
Geelong & Melbourne)
guar. 5 per cent.
Gd. Trunk. of Canada
Do. 6 p. c. Dcben
Gt, In. Pen. g. 5 pert
Do. New. guar. 5 p.c.
Gt. Wostn. of Canada
Do. New

1031

D prae;
'8 talLb
iiSC°ll.

fr°l3l
DOP3
LO Pntrf
lree
bell 6
IPWOOlre gal 3
f th

;2s6d

d the
1r a
,g, all

Do. fide., payable '571
Do. do., '76, p.
'60...
Do. do., '73, do. . '
Do. do., '73, witho.t;

25
10
L 0.6

uR•

option
Madras, guar. 4:3 p.e 1
Do. do., 5 per C.
Do. 4i p. c. Eaten.'
Do. 3d Ex., g. sp.e.
Do. 4th Ex., do,
Oude (Limited)
Seinde, guar.., per 0
Do.

ad— i S:IJ

a d -- ad
7i -- tql
181 -- 88
75 -- 80
74 -- 78

St.
St.
St.
St.

••• -
T.
23 - 24

- 121
- 107
- 100

119 -- 121
125 -- )27
74 -- 76
10i -- 'Li

233 - 243
101 - 193
101 - 103

i 6 14
28 - 28

4 - lA

tied for so long a period, be it therefore enacted that the
children of parents married as aforesaid shall be and con-
tinue legitimate, unless a suit be duly instituted for an-
nailing the marriage of their parents within two years."
The circumstance which led him to introduce that bill
was the marriage of a noble lord of high rank who was a
member of that house. His attention was drawn to the
children and the succession of the eldest son, and the re-
sult was, as in many other cases, that a particular in-
stance of hardship led to a general alleviation in the state
of the law. The bill was read a second time without op-
position, leing generally approved by their lordships ;
but between the first and the second readings, a right
rev, prelate, for whose memory he entertained great re-
swat, and who possessed great influence in that house,
owing to his position, his talents, and his masterly elo-
quence, had a conversation with him and a noble and
learned friend of his now in the north on the subject, in
whistle he declared that be entirely disapproved of the bill,
and that in his opinion all such marriages ought to be de-
clared void, observing that parties would then know
wbat wan the law, and if they committed an offence
against it they would take the consequences. The conse-
quences were that in committee the whole character of
the b:ll was entirely changed. By whom these amend-
ments were moved he did not recollect. The new title of
the bill was as follows :—" An act to render certain mar
riages valid, and to alter the law with respect to certain
voidable marriages." It was enacted that all marriages
which should thereafter be celebrated between persons
within the prohibi ed degrees should ipso facto be void,
not merely voidable. By another clause it was provided
that unless proceedings were instituted for the purpose
of annulling past marriages before the passing of the bill,
no proceedings whatever should ever he instituted. Such
was tire history of the bill ; such was the result of the
aonsultation with the right rev, prelate of whom he had
before spoken. On rising he stated that it was not his
intention to enter into the general question, and he
still meant to abstain from doing so. There were
some circumstances, however, with which he was
acquainted, to which, as they had some bearing on the
question, he would for a moment advert. He was inti-
mately acquainted with the state of society in a district
of New England ; he alluded to the state of Maesachus-
sette, of which the city cf Boston was the capital. He
had several near conw-xions there, and he would under-
take to say that there was not in any part of the cit i-
lised world a people more intelligent, more moral, and
particularly more moral as regarded the intercourse cf
the sexes, than the people of the state to which be re
ferred, and yet in that state the marriages in gee tion
were not only legal but cf constant occurrence. (Hear.)
Now, he did not for a moment mean to ray that a law
which produced no ill effect in one state of society might
not produce ill effects ire another state of society, a state
of society with different habhe and different mariners.
He stated as a witness the fact to which he had re-
ferre ', and he left it to noble lords who might take part
in the dismission to draw the inference from that fact.
He thought he had not done amiss in alluding to the
state of society in another country, and he felt sure that
what he had said on that subilct would have due weight
with their lordships. (Hear.)
Earl NELSON thought a fair interpretation of the
chapter in Leviticus, which had been so often referred
to, wan to be arrived at solely by the simple process of
analogy. Without that they would lie led to the most
absurd conclusions. For example, in the chapter in
question, while there was a law against adultery and
ether deuces, there was no prohibition of a man marry-
ing his own daughter. The prohibition was arrived at
by analogy, a sou's marrying his mother being expressly
prohibited. It a mere omieeien were relied upon, it might,
be said that though a man might not covet his neigh.
hour's wife, a wife might covet her neighbour's husband,
the latter offence: not being protileitei along with the
former. (dear.) The example of protestant Germany
was re!iel upon by the advocates of the hill. Teat ex =-
pie would carry them farther, and lead to still greater
rel.x itione. Aa regarded the moral ground, he denied
ti at morality would be promoted by passing this Lill,
because some persons were living in a state of wicked-
ness. The hilt was not in reality, as many represented
it to be, a bill in which the lower cles4es were e peciaby
interested. It was a b.d the chief el j set of which was to
legitimise children, an I the lowt r cia,see, having scarcely
any property, cared but little about the mett,r. He was
toe find r f religious liberry to feel himself bound tolegis-
!ate by the rule of the Church, but if is a matter of this
kind every man was to be left to his own individual
opinion where were they to stop ? Greer ) It was we ll
known that the agitation for this measure was got up
by a olive, a liti t xpeeded a great deal of money t i carry
their views into effect. Of the r, ligioue t relies the Brwe
fists were the only persuasion who petiiitmed in any
numbers in favour of the bill. Tim Pre.-byterians of
Sc°
layertl.' crjoduannt rdy,jf Iwertesekspod,
o papnd os
etdh et
oßiotua
thatn C: t;.ll,oey 1 iwc se
roei
et he
x
emptied fruits its operatioo. (Hear.) He hoped their
lordships would re j- et the measure.
Vt-c unt DUNGANNON said ire opposed the second
reading because he le bayed it world destroy the social
intercourse and pi-,ace cf families, and introduce distrust,
where there now existed nothing but con fidenceand affec-
tion. He did not think that these marriages were di-
rectly prohibited in Scripture ; but f .r the reason he had
stated, he implored their lordships not to aesAit to the
seemed reading. (Hear.)
..

The Royal assent was given, by commission, to the
following bills :—Funded D.bt, Hainault Forest (Allot-
ment'of Commons), Durham County Palatine Juriadic•
tiGn, New General Post-offics (alinurgh), Navigation
Advances (Ireland), Prescription (Ireland), Munioip d
Franchise, Universities and Colleges Estates, Militia
Ballot Suspension ; Churches, &a (Ireland) ; Confirma-
tion (..f Executors, &c., Ecclesiastical Corporations
LenAng ; Nisi Prins Court, &c. (Ireland) ; Stanbape and
Welsingham Rectories, Law of False Pretences
Amendment, Jews' Oaths, Marriages (Moscow,
Tahiti, &c ), Joint-stock Companies Amendment
Acts, Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Continuance, Charit ;dole
Trusts Act Continuance, Copyhold and Enclosure Com-
missioners (Indemnity), Dublin and Meath Railway,
Ilesketh Marsh, Devon Valley, Brkenhead Improve-
ment Commissioners (Gas and Water), Oford, Worces-
ter, and Wolverhampton Railway, Windsor New Road,
Newport, Abergaveuny, and Hereford Railway, Cry-
stal Palace District Gas, Whitehavon Junction Rail-
way, Lancaster and Carlisle Railway (No. 2), Chester
and Holyhead Railway, London and North-Western
Railway (additional works), St. Leonard's, Shoreditch,
Parish, Stockton, Middlesborough, and Yarmc uthWater,
North Yorkshire and Cleveland Railway, Ssvern Valley
Railway (Extension of Time), Manchester Junction,
Athenry and Tuam Railway, Manchester, Sheffiell, and
Lincolnshire and Great Northern Railway Companies,
East Kent Railway (Western Extension), Formartine
and Buchan Railway, Shrewsbury and Weichpool Rail-
way, East Suffolk, Yarmouth, and Haddi,ccs and
Lowestoft and Beccles Railway Companies Amalgama
tion, Cleveland Railway, Stockton an,l Darlington Rail-
way (Durham Lines), Stockton and Darline,ton Rail.
way (North Riding Lines), Stockton and Darlirgton
and 'Wear Valley, &c., Railway Companies Amalgama-
tion, Victoria Station and Pimlico Railway, Hove um
provement, North Briti-h and Altrincham Rail way
(No. 2), Redditch Railway, Westminster Palace Hotel
Company, Earl of Fife's Estate, Sir B2rjamin Hall's
Estate, and Holroyd's Estate.
The Royal Commmissioners were the Lord Chancel-
lor. Lord St. Leonards, and Lord Cran worth.
Their lordships adjaurned during plaasure.

The LORD C}L&NC2LLOR took his seat on the wool
sack at five o'clock.

Petitions in favour cf the legalisation of marriage
with a deceased wife's sister were presented by Lord
Ebury, Viscount Torrington, Lord Gige, and Lord
Wrottesley.

-- d
1021 -- 104
IP

17 18
37 38
72 75
20a —20 i
id par
17f —17 A,
33 - 3,12,1

;106 - 110
;103 - 110

103 -- 106
174 -18 i
194 -- 20
lid -- ljd
d d
g d id

par

1021

38 71 81
75 4
204
3j

FOREIGN.
10 all Antwrp &Rotterdam 51 5i
20 all Ardennes .•• •••
20 3 Bahia & Francisco lid par
5 all Belgian East. Janet — 11
20 all Beziers to Graissessac ... ... .
6 all Carineaux&Toulouss
Coal Mines and Ry. 21 2i
20 15 Dutch Rhenish
20 all Eastern of France - 251
20 2s. Euphrates Valley
20 all Gt. Central of France ... ...
20 all Great Luxembourg 7l 71 71 i
1.0 6 Italian Junction •• •••
20 all 1.....,Ke Const. & Bale ... ...
20 all Lierro and Turnhout ... •••d
20 6 Lombardo-Venetian 2i 3 2
5 all Lucca & Pist.sp.c.p. ... ..
20 all Lyons and Geneva 221 231
33 all Maria Antenia
10 all Do. New ••• •••
20 all Namur & Liege
20 all Da. do. 6p. c. Pref 2ll —21 i
16 all Northern of France 361 361' 301
20 8 Do. New
. ••• ,
10 all NorwegianTrnk.Pref 81 91
20 all Paris and Lyons 3Ol 301, 301 3
20 all Ditto New
20 all Paris and Orleans 49 51
20 9 Recife d; San Fran ,
(Pernam.) g. 7p. c. a Ad'
20 13 Riga and Dunaburg ... ...
10 all Rome and Frsseati... ... ...
20 ar Royal Danish ..... .... ... —• ...
5 all Royal Swedish.. ...... , ... •••
4 all Do. 7 per cent ... ... •••
20 all Sambre and Meuse... 71 7i
10 all Do. 51 per cent. pref. 86 81
20 all Southern of France.. 19i 201.
8i all West Flanders 4l 5
10 all Do. 51 per c. Pref
20 all W.& N.W. of France 2S 21
:(2:00405500
atasolll A
Bank
Bxri
arEiniakti rs
20 6 Western of Austria ... ...
20 all West. of Switzerland .... ...
6 all W est aden
6 all Do. Bp. cent. pref. ... ,—. ...
20 ah Zealand •• • ••• ••• •••
JOINT-STOCK BANKS.
254503: 23
40 alllo . . -- ...
CB .r 11
.3
ke .11. f BI
kn
:ALI nt
:Cob . ' 3 2 '
1020
50
oity
.. . pmotne rica n. I 245-383.3 ----
d'haoolffaNULsEi.oniagnAytded Serv. 863 873 86
1.20 c
000 , i 1 i
02205
°C oo n
ilo i
lia
Commercialcsi .ecah. rol
. c ii. 3... a
.. 6
1.01 i:ofu6. ia Loud. A... , ;o.
la. , ,
..K,
t" . 61...1..09.; 1 :—___ 61....2...2i: 29
202 aliall 1 LEoling:
50 20 !London and County ... ..•‘96 1
50 10 i London Joint Stock. • 0,
100 20 ,Lond.andNirestminst, ::: ". "
100 35 N I ational Pro. of Eng. ... 496 9
20 10 Do. New
••• •••
50 25 Nationa.ll3ank
... _ . se..
20 all New South Wales ..•• ... _
...
25 all Oriental Bank Corp 37 33 371 7
20 all Ottoman Bank 1 161 17 161
100 25 Provincial of Ireland i6l 63 611 2
10 all
••• ... 2to
25 all
New
1 astralia
Do.
South N
25 I 15 , Do. Nov
25 I all Union of Australia...! ... ••• 53 21
.. 15 Do. NOW
50 10 Union of London
.00 1 50 Unity Mutual
is 00 100 Totraßk of Lola 19 = 17d

40 - 45

0

II origin of the human race was from a mixture of blood,
• such as people would now regard with horror, and as the
worst form of incest. The sin of incest, therefore, me t
e
not be regarded as a sin against nature, bat a prohibi-
t Von of divine wisdom and love to the race of mac, in
order from '.this prohibition to draw blessings upon
1 the race at large, which, but forahis prohibition, would
• not have been given. If this was •the true view it fol-
• lowed that it was in the power of the Supreme Lawgiver
) for a sufficient advantage, at a ' particular time 'to enact
• that which was contrary to His ordinary loving enact-
; ment for the race, in order that at a particular time
come particular result, which he saw would bee for the
good of the race, might be accomplished.:-thet special
object in the case referred to being to keep aleais the line
• of descent ,through which the Messiah was to be called.
The command in that case to raise up seed to the dead
brother was a supercession by the Supreme Lawgiver
for certain manifest purposes of the law which He was
pleased to lay down as the rule for the general welfare of
His creatures. (Hear.)- The noble ord said that it
seemed to be the general opinion that the religious argu-
ment was abandoned. •He denied that. For himself—
and he believed he might also venturatolay it 'f,r his
right rev. brethren—he said that they took heartily and
ers.animo the declaration of the church • that. such mix-
tures were contrary to God's law, were incestuous, and
therefore void from the beginning. They grounded this
not only on the chapter of Leviticus, but on the New
Testament legislation ou the subject. It was a mistake
to say that the main strain of the scriptural argument
rested on a single text in Leviticus. As far as he remem-
bered the debates on this subject, that text had always
been used by the advocates for a change in the law as
being a text which shook the rest of the scriptural argu-
ment. The soripturalargument from the Old Teaaereet
rested mainly on the early part of the chapter referred
to, from the 6th to the 16:h verse.- The noble viscount
bad stated that it was very doubtful whether there was
any al'ueicn in those verses to marriage at all ; .he con-
tended that it rather referred to what. might occur in
private life ;. and. rested..thia view on the 'interpretation
of one wordlu.the Septuagintand the Vulgate. The most
conclusive way of ascertaining what the word Meant was
by inquiring what was the interpretation ptit upon it
by the .commentators of that church who drew up
the Vulgate. Not one of them put upon it the inter-
pretation contended for by the noble visceuzits They
all put upon it the interpretation that it was the proin-
blisn of marriage between those who were nearly con-
nected by the ties ( f blood or affinity. The Septuagint
version used a word which hal always been taken in the
Eastern Church as meaning the mixture by marriage of
those who, whether by blood or affinity, were in near
relationship. Going up to a higher authority, there was
not the shadow of a doubt about the word used in the
'Hebrew ; and tke English version was as near as pos-
sible an exact translation of the Hal sew words—" None
of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him,
to uncover their nakedness. lam the Lord." This being
so, the argument remained as it bad been urged by the
noble earl, that whether related by blood or by parallel
degrees of affinity, those marriages were distinctly for-
bidden.to the Jews by the Old Testament. But they
argued this mat er on far too narrow a basis, ky thus
wrangling over particluer texts in which the law was
laid down to the people of God cf old. Could there be
any reasonable doubt that the whole course of God's
legislation . hal been to introduce new measures of
strictness, instead • of relaxation, in dealing with the
married lif s, (Hear, hear.) Just as He had in-
teeded to rates a people in ths Peale of civilisation—
just as He had increased to them His religious guidance
and assistance—just so far bad. He strengthened the
lew in thom things which referred to the intercourse of
the two sexes. Every one could-see a reasonable ground
for that. It was in order to promote such a state of
society in the Cerietian church that men and women
suet with such a degree of freed :ne, safety and mutual
affecti in, as could only he secured by laws which re-
ttra'ned sexual intercourse beyond what it had been
before. If, es 'n Eespt of old, where the detestable
(leen ine of Isis allowed brothers and sisters to contract
marriage, this system had continued, there would have
been an end to teat frecelem of intercourse between
me:nbers of the same family which preveiled in every
Christian land, where this roost henecoleot restraint of
the law of God had substituted higher feelings for the
lower animal affecti us. (Hear, beer.) When our
blessed Lord laid it down as a principle that man and
wife should be one flesh he a, Iced all those difficult
cues' ions which men might raise as to particular degrees
of relationship. The law as it etood Lad always pre-
varied in Christendom ; it had been held both by
the Church in the east and the west. Let him !let
leo told that the Roman Catholic Church silo eel dis-
pensations for those marriage,. What did pled not
allow dispensations fur? (Hear, hear.) On, behalf
of the reformed church of England, which it was
his happiness and glory to belong to, tee must declare
that ruch were Ent the Lotions of marriage which were
held by the ref >mere of the Eugli Is Church. It at a
one of our great blessings that we had been breught tack
from that system of dispensation to what had been held
in primitive times as the undoubted word of the law of
God. And who was the particular Roman pontiff who
had introduced this change ? It was the infamous Borgia
--a man who, under vows of celibacy and sanctity, was
more than suspected to be living in ehamelees incest ; he
greeted those dispensations under the colourable pretext
of enlarging - the power of the Remieh see, which had
never before claimed the power of dispensing with mar-
, r ageP. The voice el the Eastern Church and the Wes-
tern Church, and the unbroken testimony of the early
church, Owe ad that this was the true interpretation of
the Word of God, and that it probibt ted these mix-
tures. Thera ire it was with no hesitating voice that
he and his right reverend brethren who thought with
him put forward the scriptural and religious argument
that these marria.:7es were incestuous and contrary to
the law of Gcd. Upon the social argument he- would
not trouble their lord-hips nt length. The noble vis-
count had attributed the disliko of English females to
the relaxation of the constitutional jealousy of the female
mind. He denied this imputation, and believed that
it' was the natural des're c.f a woman on her deatbi ed
that her children should be provided with a suitable
protector. The real reason was this—God bad given to
the two sexes different intellec'.ual advantages : to oars,
the power of arriving at a true conclusion by reasoning;
to their's, the power of arriving ateit by intuition, which
was always in favour of that which was purest and best.
It was not the least argument against this measure that
the great niajeriiy of educated women were against it.
From inquiry in his diocese, he found that there only
three of these marriages had been contracted, and those
not amongst the poor, with whom motives of economy
might have prevailed, but amongst the middle class. If
they once relaxed the existing marriage law they must
go much further then this bill. He implored them, by
rejecting it, to preserve the purity of our English homes.
In many cases sisters were enabled to live with their
married sisters solely on the account of the impossi-
bility of these alliances. Ho asked the house on the
mere ground of humanity to protect these families ; for
no unmarried woman could ever dwell as the guardian of
her deceased sister's children if the law allowed of her
marrying the husband. Where there was a doubt
whether the blessing of the Redeemer would rest on
these marriages, it was a part of humanity no leseskntha o
of faith to refuse to sanction such unions.. He rt wn:
ledged that the framers of the bill had shown due co
sideration fir the consciences of the clergy. Could he
conscientiously have done so, he would have gladly met
them half way on this question of incest , but the law of
God was paramount.
Earl GRANVILLE questioned the statement of the
rev. prelate, that irxest was not a sin against nature,
but against
positive enactment. How was it that it did
not prevail where it was not forbidden by positive en-
actment ? This was a question on which the; house
oaght to be guided by the requirements of the public.
The opinion of the middle and lower classes was de-
cidedly in favour of these marriages. He denied that
, the women were generally opposed to the change. He
I toned those who had contracted such marriagesathough
now illegal, were perfectly, well received in their own
circles. (Hear, hear.) There was a case in Leeds where
a lady who kept a girls' school, which was well sup-
ported, had married the husband of her deceased sister,
and not a single child had been removed from the school.
No doubt these marriages were eammon in popultus
places, and even in rural districts. The Rev. Mt. Den•
ham, the rector of St. Mary's, in the Strand, stated that
be had known of many such marriages, and they hal
invariably been attended with beneficial results. Refer-
ence had been made to the apostolical canon, but the
right rev. prelate forgot that that canon forbade the
marriage of priests.
The Bishop of RIPON said that Wants his misfortune
to differ from many of his right rev..brethren on this
question. There was no direct scriptural. prohibition
of these marriages ; and the argument; nern inference
was of a very doubtful character. He believed that
Scripture sanctioned these marriages ; and be should
thezefere support the bill. . He denied that the measure
would produce the social evils that had been anticipated.
Why bad it not done so in the countries where this law
prevailed ? There had been only 300 petitions presented
to the other house against the measure, signed by
10,000 persons ; while there had been 1,047 petitions in
its favour, signed by 123,000 persons. He knew of one
town where there had been 500 of these marriages.
Believing that Scripture directly sanctioned theae unions
he should vote for, the second reading of the Lill (Rear.)
The Bishop of EXETER expressed surprise at hear-
ing this declaration from a bishop, and reminded him
that the law r f the Church of England declared these
merriaees to be irceetuous, and forbidden by thelaw of
God. (Hear, bear.) If any clergyman bad made such a
declaration irom the pulpit as that of the right rev. pre-
late he would at once have been called to account by as
faithful bishop—if he bad a faithful bishop. (.sear4
This was the law of the Church of England, b.aeicarauesde
to
bad been that of early times ; the Church claimed
be the catholic church of EnglarA
bill' itself did
,parified from
the corruptions of Romish times. Th,e,
,rev,
prelate.
not go so far as the declaration of the reeet,4ofues;
It only 1,-galiked these marriages iu
.a registrar
but this provision was inconsistent with one ccntained in
ma married under this bill
a eubaqueet clause.
of the minister
was to opply to a faithflutl a
minister for admission tic the
Holy Cotouitthion, it would be the duty
_
to tell him he was living in am, and consequently could
not be admitted t) pertake ef a sacrament which he had
learned to believe necessary to salvation.
Lard OVELISTONE hoped he had misunderstood the
right rev. prelate ; if not, he stood before their-lordships
al a man who could not be admitted to the most holy
sacrament.

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY could not agile
with the nt hie vi .count that the,,e marriages were Lot
prohibited in Scripture.
Viscount DUNGANNON—I said not directly pro-
hibited.

The Archbishop a CANTERBURY—It was dis-
tinctly laid down that the brother vas not to merry the
widow of his deceased brother, and by the rule of analogy
the Lusba•,d of a deceased sister ought to be prohibited
from marrying her rister. On social as well as on reli-
gious grounds he thought they ought not to legalise
these marriages.

Lord GRAN_ wished to state in a few words
the group thought this measure would be
inisebieeoue to the country. He looked at the question
abstracted from the religious view altogether, about which
he bad not sufficient cos fidence to express a decided
opinion. Surely one cf the most important interests to
be cultivated in marriage life was that there should be
unlimited freedom of intercourse bete een the wife and
the wife's sisters. (Hoar.) Toe husband was neces-
sarily often withdrawn from home, and it was of the ut-
most importance to the social and domestic happiness of
the wife that her own sisters should be her temilier com-
panions. Now, disguise it as they might, the wife could
not receive them with the same cordiality if the suspi-
cion crossed her mind that the sister might supply her
place if it pleased Providence to call ner cut of this world.
(Hear.) It had been s :id that no one would make SO
good a stepmother to the children as the sister of the
deceased wife. He might doubt that, but if this bill
passed ho A was the sister to take charge of the children
without creating suspicion and giving occasion to re-
mark Whether he looked to the interests of society
before nr after the wife's death, he thought this measure
would tend to impair those interests. Bet he was per-
fectly aware that what was a desirable state of the law
for the upper claviree of society might be undesirable for
the lower. If that were so, what they should do was to
strike a balance and see on which side the prepender-
ance of good and evil was to he found. But iu makieo
such an estimate they ought to be much on their guard
that they did not legislate for that class of coo:hely to which
they themselves belonged. But he did not believe that the
interests of the lower ranks of society were different in
this matter from those of the upper, and that was shown
by the distinction made in favour of Ireland and Scotland
Was it meant that in the rural districts of England there
was an inclination to marry a wife's sister. He appealed
to their lordships' experience in this matter. It these
marriages were to be permitted because the law was
sometimes violated, they might on the same ground le-
galise bigamy. He had no doubt hi, noble and learned
friend had truly described the state of morals in Massa-
chusetts, where these marriages were permitted, but he
believed if they passed this bill, that they would sanction
a measure which would be found to be at variance with
the interests of this community. (Hear.)
Lord WODEHOUSE said that the question had been
argued on two grounds—the religious and .e tas,s w
e social.eht
With reeard to the religious ground much_ 1
s, emed to be given to it on that than on forinerocca-
sions. He had no confidence in his own interpretation of
obscure texts of Scripture, but the obvious interpretation
of the often quoted verse in Levidcus seemed to him to
ha that the husband was not to take the sister of his wife
in marriage during the lifetime of the wife. (Hear.) The
opponents of the measure had been driven bit by bit
from that ground. But the rev. prelate took another I
ground, and said that there was a prohibition of two
brothers marrying
the same woman, and that by ana-
logy two sisters ought not to marry the same man.
There was plausibility in the argument, but if these
marriages were incestuous—for that was the ground of
the argument—how came it that in the same book a die
tinct injunction wasgiven to marry twobrothere? (Hear.)
He o .old not consent to supposition that God in this
instance commanded a positive injunction to violate hia
own hie, for such a hypothesis seemed to him to be de-
rogatory to divine wisdom. On the social view of the
question every man might entertain his own view, but
his view was that the law ought to be relaxed. In'BOF-
ton, where these marriages were permitted, no such in•
convenient and horrible consequences a, had been de-
scribed by the noble. lord (Rehesdale) had followed front
the permission to marry a deceased wife's sister. In
Roman
Catholic countries these marriages might take
place by dispensation, and in most Protestant countries
they a ere allowed. There appeared to him to be strong
grounds in favour of the relaxation which the bill pro-
posed. It had been said that great inconvenience would
arse in the relation between the wife and her sister if the
bill passed. The ans ver to that was that the prohibition
had not got rid of the inconvenience, for it could not be
denied that there was a large number of persons in this
country who wore either married to their wife's sister,
or, what was still wcree, lived with them in a state of
coecabinage. Per these reasons he thought a good case
had been made out in favour of the second reading of the
bill. (Hear.)
The Bishop cf OXFORD said that having on a former
occasion argued a length in favour of what he considered
• to he the true view of this question, he had no cease ion
to trouble their lordships with many remarks at the pre-
sent time. But oneor two remarks made by the noble lord
who had just spoken Seemed to require some answer. The
noble lord referred to the particular injunction in Dec-
' teronorny. that a brother should marry the wife cf his de-
ceased brother, under certain circumstances. If that ar•
gement was worth anything, it proved too much. It
proved too much for this reason, that no cue urged that it
I would bs consistent with the purity of Christian life that
a man should now marry the wife of his own brother. I.
was admitted by the common sense of Christendom that
• that would be intolera\ile. To g:ve a clear answer to the
• argument of the noble lord would rake thorn upon delicate
ground, upon which he had rather riot enter ; yet it was
The
r to answer the argument of the noLle lord.
answer seemed to be this, that incestuous intercourse was
not a sin against nature, but against positive enactment.
It must be remembered tbat by Divine appointment the

.20 71 'Australian
1 10s.1Bon Accord Cop. (li. ) 3 Bpl 1
35 27 Brazilian I Lap. (issue 1
at .C 5 pm)
30 all Do. Cocaes & Cuiada ... ...
20 15 Do. St. John Del Rey 11 12
1 1 Clarendon Con. Min.
Co. of Jamaica „fl
40 all Cobre Copper 4O 42
... 16 Copiapo
1 all Dun Mountain Cop ,
per Mining Co. 1 i
2 all Fortuna
20 all General
3 all Linares
5 11 Lusitanian
1 all Mariquita
1 all New Granada ii I
I all Noveau Monde
20 all Pont.Sil.LdM.& &nit 5 7
5 l Port Philip A - I
30 16/ Santiago de Cüba
all United Mexican 31 31
MISCELLA.NEOTTS.
1000 1000 Atlantic Tel. (Lira.) ; ... -- ...
25 19 Australian Agricult. 29 30 293 1
10 all Australn. Royal Mail 1 ••.• 11
10 I all IBerlin NV ater Works. 31 41
10 1 2 ;Do. New iss. at Si. d ... ...
50 40 (Brit. American Land ... ...
100 321 Canada lll5 120
St. 100 Do.Go.6pc.Jan&Julylll3 114 1131 1 3
St. all Copper Min, of Eng. 125 30
25 all Do. Pref. 74 p. cent. 125 27
5 all Crystal Palace ll 11
5 all IDo. Preference
4 all ;Crystal Pal. of France ...
..
20 all lEastern Steam 2l 3
St. 100 Electriclelegraph
1 all Electric Tel. of Irel ... _
..
5 all lEn.&Aust.Cop.SmCo 11 1i
10 10s. Eur. & Ind,Jctn. Tel _
. ...
9 all Eur.&Are.Stm.(lim.) n - 31
20 all Gun. Ir.Sc, Col.(lim.) ... _
...
15 1.4 Gen. Steam Navigat. .. _ .
20 5 London Discount
4 all Loud. Gen. Omnibus 21 211 23
20 10 Magdalena St. Navig. ...
...
10 all Moditeran. Elec. Tel. ... _
...
10 all Do. Extension Teleg. 71 _ 71 7,
10 all Mexican& S.Americn . 1
. 8
.. 2
25 5 Nat. Discount Co .1
10 6 Netherlands Land
.. _
..
10 all Do. Do.
5 all IDo.B p.e.PLiss.at ld ll 11
5 3 'Do. Do. - •••
100 80 New B. &N. S. Land ... _
...
St. XlOO N.S.W. Gov.s p.c.D. 981 yvA
1 all N. B. Australasian... 3 _ 4
20 all tirth .of EuropeSteare 2/ 3 i 2
1 all Oriental Gas
1 10s. Do New Shares ild II t
5 all Peellir. Ld. & /Curl 2 2i 21
50 all !Peninsular & Oriental 781 N 7Pz`ii
50 10 Do. New
71 8 p 17 i
50 all Rhymney Iron
100 60 Royal Mail Steam 59 - 61
1 all icot, Austral. Invest ll 11
St. 100 S. Ans. Gov. 6 p.c.bds lO7 109 1( 8
25 all South Austral. Land 36 3f 37
1 all Submarine Tel. Scrip 1 1 .
1. all Do. Registered
20 5Tr us. Ln. Co. Up. Can. ... ~.
10 2831 Van Diezion'ti Lancl , 101 !..... 1.11,

The Bishop cf EXETER never said t hat the supporter
of the bill ou4ht to Le secluded from the sacrament ; he
referred only to partie4 matried under its provisions.
Lord OVELISTONE said in that case his astonish.
mutt and regret Lt the light rev. prelate's remarks were
essened. Ti_ ere had Leen a difference of opinion amongst
the right r,r. bench on this subject, and he thought it
was the duty of the lay members of the house to endea-
vour to allay the leilirg of asperity between them. The
right rev. p! ela,e ho had stated his opinion that the law