The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-18 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18, 1835.

indifference, and not possessing that solemn character which
the performance of the ceremony in a church gave it. He
thought, however, that these differences of opinion and objec-
tions were easy of solution. The principle of the measure of
the Right Hon. Baronet opposite was not to make the mar-
riage contract civil ; indeed, it was less so than the mea-
sure introduced in 1834, by the distinguished advo-
cate of religious freedom who sat near him ( Lord John
Russell). If the measure was for social purposes to
be made civil, why should it not be enforced on all ci-
tizens alike, leaving them afterwards to go from the
house of the magistrate to celebrate the contract with
what religious acidity they pleased ? or, if they preferred,
by an expression of their feelings in such a joyous and so-
cial mode as they might think proper? Let every one
follow his own fancy or prejudice, and omit to perform
such religious observations as his judgment shall direct. lf,
therefore, marriage be made a civil contract, with this per-
mission, we at once dissolve all the objections raised. When
Hon. Gentlemen should give this their further attention,
he could not doubt they would see this to be the best mode
of avoiding any difficulty. Unless a proper method of regi-
stration could be adopted, it would be better deferred until
it could be completely carried out by some other and gene-
ral measure. Whether the registration should be made by
the clergyman or the magistrate, they could not remain as
they were. One complete measure of registration should
be made for the three principal objects for which it was
required—namely, registration of births, marriages, and
deaths. He hoped that the intention of the Government
was to prepare some general and perfect measure of regis-
tration, and if so, he thought the principle of registration
sought to-be established by the present Bill, had better be
deferred until it could be carried out in some future session.
He thought that any Hon. Member would be acting an
ignoble part who should make any objection to the present
measure on account of the quarter from which it came. He
had shown no eagerness to make any objection, but he had
freely expressed his opinions of the measure. He, for one,
would not hesitate to say that whatever objections may be
made by Dissenters on the details of this measure, it spoke a
kindness and regard for the feelings and situation of the Dis-
senters, which entitled the Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir R.
Peel), and gentlemen connected with him in office, to the gra-
titude of the country.--( Hear, hear.)
Mr. J. S. 'WORTL E Y could not avoid congratulating the
Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir R. Feel) on the spirit with which
he had introduced this measure ; and though there were a few
objections, and though it did not come up to the expectations
of all, yet the people of England and the Dissenters would
consider it as exhibiting a liberal and generous' spirit.
He was attached to the ceremony of marriage, and he there-
fore gave great praise to that part of the Bill which left the
Established Church in possession of the power to marry those
who might approve of its mode of worship. The measure was
not only for the benefit of the Dissenters, but for the security
of property.—( Hear, hear.) He thought there did not
appear any difficulty in the case where two persons wish-
ing to be married were of different persuasions. In
marriages where at present one party is a Catholic
and the other a Protestant, it was the custom to have the
ceremony performed in a Protestant Church, and afterwards
in the Catholic Church ; so in the case when, under the pro-
posed Bill, one party belongs to the Established Church and
one is a Dissenter, the ceremony can be performed in the
Established Church, and there will be no necessity for any
thing else. Observations had been made by the Hon. and
Learned Member for the Tower Hamlets as to the opposition
by the Members of the present Government to a measure simi-
lar in principle to the present, and which passed through that
House in 1827, and went into the House of Lords. That
measure had been supported by the late Archbishop of Can-
terbury, the Bishop of London, and the present Lord Chan-
cellor. He thought this measure was one which might have
been expected from the present Government; arid at the late
election (which was a time of great excitement and party-feel-
ing), he took upon himself to say, that if they (the people)
would wait, he knew the Right Hon. Baronet (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) would give them measures in a just and
liberal spirit—( A laugh)—that he would propose such mea-
sures as would astonish them.—( Laughter.) He did not say
they would be astonished at the change in the Right Hon.
Baronet (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), but he told them
that, from a reference to his votes and measures, he was sure he
would deal with the country in the highest spirit of liberality.
Mr. LEONARD congratulated the House on the spirit
which had pervaded the discussion ; he thought the measure
would be productive of great benefit, and it had given him
great satisfaction. He hoped that this particular measure
was only the precursor of several others to be brought forward
by the Right Hon. Baronet (the Chancellor of the Exchequer).
He trusted Dissenters,would receive this as a payment of
what was owing to them, and that they would co-operate in
making the measure as perfect as possible.
Mr. E WART would gladly be one of those who would be
willing to co-operate in that design ; but he confessed that
the measure would have been more consonant to his views, if
the Right Hon. Baronet (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
had been able to say to Dissenters and Churchmen that
marriages should be a civil contract, as it existed in
ancient times, and during the Commonwealth, and up to
the year 1754, without interfering with their opinions.
He much regretted that any distinction, or the sha-
dow of a distinction, should exist. The time would
come when this distinction would no longer exist. An objec-
tion had been urged as to persons of particular religious per-
suasions being compelled to go before a magistrate, who fre-
quently would be found to be himself a clergyman of the
Church of England. However, it was likely there would be
an alteration of the magistrates of the country take place,
and (as we understood the Hon. Member) they would be made
stipendiary, and clerical persons would no longer be suffered
to be in the commission of the peace. The Dissenters de-
sired not to have recourse to the Church of England. There
was in all countries except this only one civil office for regis-
tration, and he thought the establishment of a general regis-
tration of births, marriages, and deaths here, would secure the
rights and property of all. While these qualifications of the
measure were temporary, its principle was eternal, and would
confer honour on the Right Hon. Baronet when the objections
were swept away.
Lord SANDON thought the measure, from its general out-
line, would be productive of many advantages.
Mr. ROEBUCK wished to extend all civil privileges to
every class of the community. The Right Hon. Baronet
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) gets over the difficulty felt
by the Noble Lord. (Sandon). He takes the leap, and de-
clares what he never heard a Minister of the Crown declare,
that " a marriage was a civil contract."—( Hear.) Though
the law would interfere to see that there was no fraud, and
though it attached a religious sanction to it, yet, as far as the
law considered the contract, it was only a civil one. If it
were true as a general principle, it was also true as to the
Church. He thought, that treating marriage as a mere civil
right, was not trenching, in the least, on the feelings of re-
ligion in the community. As to the difficulty felt by some,
as to a clergyman keeping a register of marriage, he confessed
he did not feel that difficulty, nor did he see any thing ob-
jectionable or degrading in a clergyman acting merely as a
registrar. Indeed, he could not see a more useful purpose for
a parish priest than that. He thought that the registrar
might still be kept in the same place as at present, the certifi-
cate being sent from the Magistrate. He did not see why
all should not go before the Magistrate, and the register to
some part of the country, to form a general registry. The
opinions of philosophers in propounding such doctrines as he
had alluded to were d►sagreeable to the Noble Lord ( Sandon.)
Lord SANDON would ask whether the lion. Gentleman
was entitled to give a lecture to the House on arrogance or
acrimony ?
Mr. W. PR AED looked with delight to the tone of the
discussion on this
,question, and to the just compliments paid
by the Hon. Gentlemen opposite to the Right Hon. Baronet
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) ; and lie felt assured that
no less justice would be done, from that side (the Ministerial
side of the House), to those measures of amendment which
might come from the Opposition side of the House.
Many objections had been thrown out to the proposed
measure—all .of them, he had no doubt, in a perfectly fair
and justifiable spirit; he would notice one or two of them.
Some Hon. Gentleman—the Hon. Member for Liverpool, he
believed,---(" No ! " from Mr. Ewart.)— some one else, then,
had observed that the Dissenters would object to the payment
of the fees. But that objection would not stand on any reli-
gious ground—it would not form any part of the religious ob-
jection which the Dissenters urged to the present state of the
law. The Hon. Member for Kircudbright (Mr. C. Fergus-
son) had made an objection to this effect—that the ceremony
of marriage ought not to consist in the performance of any rite
or vow before the magistrate ; that that performance, indeed,
ought to be evidence of the ceremony, but that the ceremony
itself ought to consist in the proved consent of the parties.
That uas not a stable or a fair objection. The Hon. Mem-
ber for Leeds (Mr. Baines) had asked why not insert a
clause in the Bill, pointing out the desire of the Legislature
that marriage should be a religious obligation ? The Hon.
Member for Kircudbright, on the other hand, said, why
not make it entirely a civil obligation? This circumstance
would show how great was the difficulty of meeting the wishes
of classes of Dissenters whose principles were so opposite as
those of the two Hon. Members ; nevertheless he did think that
the present Bill fulfilled the desires of both. He himself
thought it desirable that marriage should be a religious obliga-
tion ; but he did not think it desirable that it should be made
so. by an Act of Parliament.

principle of this Bill, he felt some reluctance in observing that
he could not altogether adopt the reasoning which the Right
Hon. Baronet had made himself master of, and had used in
his introduction of the Bill to the House. He could not
agree with him in what he declared to be the principle of mar-
riage in a former period of the history of this country. He
should not consider it worth while to make the objection, were
it not that 'the debates of the House became public : and he
considered it much more desirable to state here any dif-

ferences of opinion entertained, than to leave theirs to ob-
servations to be made out of doors.—(Hear.) The truth
was this : In ancient times in this country, marriage was
good and valid without the interference of a priest ; then
came the Council of Trent, which declared that marriage
should become a religious ceremony. At the time of the
Reformation, the provision of the Council of Trent was
refused, and if a man accepted a woman as his wife per
verba de prcesenti, that was a good and valid marriage ; but
some Courts had the power to compel marriage according to
ecclesiastical form, to secure the inheritance of real property.
Such was the state of things till 1754, when the marriage law
passed, which was confined in its operation to England and
Wales • but some doubt having arisen as to whether it was
intended to include Presbyterians, and the subject having
undergone the serious consideration of Mr. Justice Bosanquet,
Mr. Canning, who was then at the head of the Board of Con-
trol, brought in a Bill to declare the marriages in the doubtSul
cases to which he had alluded valid. He made these observa-
tions, feeling that unless he noticed the subject, it might be
supposed that prior to the year 1754 marriage was solely a
civil contract, and no means existed of compelling persons to
celebrate marriage in facis ecclesice. He thought it would be
unbecoming in him to trouble the House at any considerable
length at the present time, but he begged to be allowed to
state that in his opinion one of the greatest difficulties the
Right Hon. Baronet would have to contend against would arise
from the making of the registries.—( Hear, hear.) He
thought it most desirable, if possible, to establish a system by
which clandestine marriages might be prevented. Few
people knew the misery that frequently resulted from un-
fortunate marriages of that description • and the reason
was obvious, for when it happened to families that such cala-
.

mities befel them, it became their interest to conceal the un-
fortunate circumstances. His great anxiety, then, was that
such regulations should be made as would give the necessary
publicity to prevent the solemnization of clandestine mar-
riages, and, at the same time, would not throw what might
be considered improper difficulties in the way of the solemni-
zation of marriage, when it was not liable to objection. He
certainly hoped that those who were about to contract mar-
riage would not consider any little restriction that might be
proposed intolerable, when they reflected on the incalculable
mischief which resulted from clandestine marriages.—( Hear,
hear.) He rejoiced that the Right Hon. Baronet had the
courage to come forward with this measure ; and when he re-
collected how anxious some of the members of the late Admi-
nistration were to administer complete relief to the Dissenters,
who complained of grievances, he could not but regret that
they knew they were in that situation that, even had they pro-
posed such a measure as would receive the approbation of this
House, it was certain to be defeated elsewhere.—( Cries of
" No, no ;" and " Hear, bear.")
Mr. P. HOWARD could not refrain from offering his hum-
ble tribute of gratitude to the Right Hon. Baronet for the
measure which he had propounded to the House : it would
give satisfaction not only to the large body of Protestant Dis-
senters, but also to that Church to which he belonged. It
would give great satisfaction to the Roman Catholics of
England. _ _

Mr. BA INE S w ished to unite his tribute of acknowledgment
to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of his Majesty's Govern-
ment for the friendly spirit towards the Protestant Dissenters
in which this measure was conceived, and for the clear and sa-
tisfactory manner in which he had conveyed his sentiments to
the House.---( Hear, bear.) He did not think that there would
be felt amongst the Protestant Dissenters any objection to the
Bill, as far as related to constituting marriage a civil contract,
or to the registration of their marriages through the medium
of the magistrates; but there might be objections to some
of the details ; though those, he hoped, might, without
much difficulty, be removed.—( Hear, hear.) To give the
greater solemnity to the marriage contract, he thought
that some religious service ought to he engrafted upon
that contract, and that the service should he performed
by the minister of the religious body to whom the parties
were attached. With regard to the registry at the parish
church, he hoped that this was to be considered a tempo-
rary, and not a perimanent arrangement, subject to alteration
from a general registry bill ; because, as a permanent measure,
he did not think that it would be satisfactory to the Protestant
Dissenters that their marriages should be required to pass
through the register of the Established Church. He knew
that a strong feeling existed on this point amongst the persons
whose grievances this Bill was intended to redress, and that
they considered it as an implied admission of subserviency or
inferiority to the Church with which they claimed an equality
of privileges. The changes mentioned by the Right Hon.
Gentleman were also open to objection. To persons in bum-
ble life the fee of seven shillings would be considered unduly
high, and would operate as a barrier against the poorer classes
availing themselves of the privilege of marriage according to
the proposed form. There was another topic on which he
wished to make an inquiry. What was to be done when the
parties contracting marriage were of different religious per-
suasions, one of them being of the communion of the Este-
' blished Church, and the other a Protestant Dissenter ? Ac-
cording to the certificate, or declaration, that had been read
by the Right Hon. Baronet, the husband's faith was to regu-
late the wife's. Was this intended ?—or was it meant that if
either of the parties were members of the Establishment, that
the other was to conform ?—( Hear, hear.) In offering these
suggestions, he hoped that it would be understood that he did
not wish to cast any unnecessary impediments in the way of
the Bill. He was of opinion that it would prove a tranquil-
lizing and healing measure. Of all things on earth, matrimo-
nial contracts ought to give rise to harmonious feelings—( A
laugh)—and it was his earnest desire that the measure might
be carried to a happy consummation.—(Laughter.)
Mr. C. FERGUSSON contended that marriage ought to
be a purely civil contract,—that no religious feeling or cere-
mony ought to form part of it.--(" No, no !" and " Hear,
hear.") Such was his opinion ; he would have marriage a
civil contract alone, deliberately to celebrate it by any cere-
mony that they preferred.—( Hear, hear.) He could not
agree with his Hon. and Learned Friend (Dr. Lushington)
in his statement, that there was the least doubt as to what
the ancient law of England was respecting marriage : it was
merely a civil contract. The Act stated that it was not meant
to extend to Scotland, Ireland, or parts beyond the sea ; there-
fore there was no occasion for the Act passed in the time of
Mr. Canning, which was, in fact, merely a declaratory Act.
There were now cases of inheritance depending, large amounts
being involved, which arose out of marriages in India. There
were some parts of the present Bill that he thought would re-
quire amendment. The husband might belong to the Church
of England, and the wife might be a Dissenter; but the de-
claration required the party to state that they were Dissen-
ters. In his opinion, it ought to be suScient for the party to
declare that they objected to be married according to the
Church of England ceremony—( Hear, hear)—the first part
of the declaration read by the Right Hon. Member ought to
be omitted.—( Hear, hear.) No similar declaration was re-
quired from the Roman Catholics ; he believed the oath re-
quired by the measure for the relief of the Roman Catholics
might be taken by any person who was not a Roman Catholic.
He trusted that the measure before the House was but the
prelude to a more perfect one.
Mr. P. THOMSON said it was impossible for any one to
feel more political hostility towards the Government of the
Right Hon. Baronet than he did—but that hostility should
never lead him to oppose measures proposed by the Govern-
ment that were calculated, in his judgment, to benefit the
country. When he had heard the separation of the Church
from the State recommended, lie had not hesitated to express
his dissent from that recommendation—but at the same time
he had always stated to the great body of Dissenters constitu-
ting the larger portion of his constituents, that it would be
his earnest endeavour to aid in all measures which were cal-
culated to relieve them from their grievances. Entertaining
these feelings, lie had heard with great satisfaction the
speech made by the Right Honourable Baronet, and be
concurred especially in the principles which he had there
laid down. He hoped that those principles would be the
ground-work of the Bill, which he must see before he
could express his unqualified approbation of it : if they
were, in his opinion, much, as regarded this particular point,
would be gained by the Dissenters. He thought it desirable
that some religious ceremony should accompany the perform-
ance of the contract ; and in this respect he differed from his
Hon. and Learned Friend. He considered the religious rites
calculated to impress more deeply on the mind the solemn
obligations the parties were entering into.--( Hear.) While
he said this, however, he thought the Right Hon. Baronet
might have carried his principle a .little farther, and extended
it to persons belonging to the Church of England who might
object to being obliged by law to perform the marriage cere-
mony according to the tenets of the Church. The distinction
made by the Right Hon. Baronet was likely to leave a point
of grievance to the Dissenters. He might be told it was
imaginary only, and so he admitted it was ; but it was natural
for men not to be content if they did not consider themselveg
in such matters on a perfect equality. The alteration pro-
posed with respect to the registration he hoped would be the
first step towards a general system of registration.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY hoped the same good feeling with
which the measure was received in the House would charac-
terize its reception out of doors ; and that in the spirit in
which the Right Hon. Baronet had made his speech he would
receive any suggestions offered to him for the improvement of
the measure. Many Dissenters, he believed, would object to
what they would consider magisterial control. There was a
general prejudice against the interference of magistrates, and
the interference now proposed might tend to increase the pre-
judice. On the other hand, the Dissenter might still further
object to the registration of the marriage by the clergyman,
when the magistrate should have transmitted the certificate to
him for that purpose. So that, whether it be considered as a
religious or civil ceremony, the measure would be open to ob-
jection by one or the other. If it be considered civil, then the
objection against the interference of the magistrate would be
urged by the clergyman of the Established Church ; and if
religious, then you array, on the part of the Dissenters, the
whole force of the objections encountered by the Noble
Lord ( Russell) in the introduction of his measure relating
to marriage during the last Session. Thus, if a marriage
contract be made only civil, you have the hostility of the
clergyman of the Established Church ; if religious, that of
the whole Dissenting community. Another objection had been
made by the Hon. Member fee Boston (Mr. Wilks), as to
making wider the present distinction which exists between
parties of different persuasions in contracting marriages, by
removing the imposition of any declaration of creeds, or other-
wise, for that ceremony. Now, going to that extent, it was
bjected, would induce many to consider their alliances with-
out religious sanction, as open to the imputation of levity, or

Mr. EWART and Mr. C. FERGUSSON explained
Mr. S HEIL said that there was much good in the Bill; but
there were some points on which consideration was necessary.
There was much difficulty about the matter of registra-
tion ; and he thought it not a little curious in the pro-
posed arrangement that while the magistrate, before
whom the civil contract was to take place, would receive
two shillings for his fee, the clergyman who was to register
the marriage would receive five. Might it not be feared
that Dissenters would consider the difference of the fee
as a proof that there was to be a difference, to a certain extent,
in favour of the Established Church ? But the Right Hon.
Baronet had stated that his mind was not fully made up on
this subject; he (Mr. Sheill) might be allowed, therefore, to
trust that there would be a public functionary appointed for
the purpose of making the registration. There was another
point worthy of notice : the Bill would only apply to cases in
which both parties were Dissenters, and not to those in which
the one party was a member of the Church and the other a
Dissenter ; the consequence of this would be, that instead of
attracting persons to the Established Church, it would have
the effect, possibly, of seducing them from it. He trusted that
the Right Hon. Baronet would give them as large and
as comprehensive a measure with respect to the Church of
Ireland.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that no objection
had been brought against the principle of the proposed Bill ;
all the observations made referred only to matters of detail,
which would be fit subjects of discussion when the Bill was in
Committee. Although a zealous and sincere friend of the Esta-

blishment, he had always thought that no Dissenter ought to
experience any disadvantage, and that no member of the Church
ought to enjoy any benefit, on account of his religious opinions ;
that for all secular purposes,' for every matter of civil and
social life, for every profession except that of the. Church it-
self, all persons alike ought to he placed on the same foot-
ing. It had been said that. marriage ought to be made a civil
contract for all persons. He claimed, on behalf of those who,
as members of the Church of England, had been long in the
habit of considering it as a solemn and a religious ceremony,
that if Dissenters were allowed to relinquish the religious
ceremony, and adopt only- the civil one, they on their part
should be allowed to abandon the civil contract and adopt
only the religious ceremony. He asked this for himself, and
for all conscientious members of the Church ; and he asked no
more than he was willing to grant to others.
Mr. EST COURT fully concurred in what had fallen from
the Hon. and Learned Attorney-(mineral. He (Mr. Est-
court) was not disposed to quarrel with those who' wished to
consider marriage as a civil contract ; but he claimed for the
members of the Church a similar liberty of freely regarding
it as a religious ceremony. He expressed his gratitude to his
Right Hon. Friend (Sir Robert Peel) for the introduction of
the measure, and thought it by far the most likely to conci-
liate the opinions of all classes of-persuasions, of all the mea-
sures which he had seen brought forward in the course of his
parliamentary life.
Sir JOHN CAMPBELL believed that the measure was
brought forward in a due spirit of liberality, but said that it
would offer the first instance in which a difference had been
made between the members of the Church and Dissenters as
to the mode in which the relation of marriage was to be con-
tracted. Such a distinction had never existed as the Right
Hon. Baronet had mentioned. Before Lord Hardwicke's
Act, both classes were at liberty to enter into the relation per
verba de prassenti, without the intervention of a priest. This
was a civil contract, and was followed by all the consequences
of a valid marriage; the children were legitimate, and were
entitled to inherit both the real and personal property of the
parents. By Lord Hardwicke's Act marriage was made a
perfectly religious ceremony, and none could be valid without
the intervention of a priest. By the present measure the com-
munity was to be divided into two portions, for one of which
there was to be one kind of marriage, and for the other another
kind. The Bill brought in by his Noble Friend last year,
although it was defective, still went on the principle of esta-
blishing one sort of marriage for all of his Majesty's
subjects. His Noble Friend had probably thought, as he him-
self thought, that it ought to be a civil contract ; that a civil
contract should constitute ipsum matrimon ium ; but consider-
ing that the public might not be fully prepared for that, lie
made his Bill declare that it should be a religious- one, still
following the Jgreat principle of having one sort of marriage
for all persons. The present Bill said that all who belonged
to the Church should be able to contract marriage only by the
intervention of a priest, but that those who did not belong to
the Church should go before the civil magistrate. This ar-
rangement would not cure the existing evil in many instances,
for he believed that many classes of Dissenters looked on mar-
riage as a religious ceremony.—(Hear, hear.) There would
be no hardship in adopting the same system as prevailed in
Catholic countries—where marriage was regarded as a sa-
crament—of requiring the parties simply to go before a
civil magistrate before they went to the altar. There was
one point of detail he wished to notice ; if the magistrate
were to be the person who was to receive the notice, before
whom the ceremony was to be performed, and by whom the
certificate was to be transmitted, he feared that he would dis-
charge no one of those three duties well. Before Lord Hard-
wicke's Act, there were parsons who were willing to
celebrate clandestine marriages for a small sum ; if the pro-
posed Bill were to pass in its present form, he feared that
there would be found magistrates acting improperly in regard
to one of the three duties mentioned. He thought that it
would be necessary to have some public functionary appointed
by the Crown to discharge them in a particular district.
Another clause of the Bill he begged to enter his protest
against—that which required an oath to be taken that the
parties did not belong to the Church of England ; it was a
needless multiplication of oaths. He should be willing to
render every assistance in his power towards effecting any im-
provement in the provisions of the Bill.

Mr. WARBUiZTON considered the Bill to be intended

for the relief of the Dissenters, and thought the Right Hon.
Baronet had completely fulfilled that intention. If any party
had a right to complain of the measure it was the member of
the Church of England, who might say that he was not placed
on precisely the same footing as the Dissenter. With refer-
ence to registration, the same complaint might equally be made
by both : the Dissenter could not be said to have any griev-
ance imposed on him in this respect.
Mr. M'CANCE congratulated the Right Hon. Baronet on
having become a Reformer, and said that if he pursued the
same course with respect to the Irish Church as with respect
to this subject he would be safe in his present situation for this
session—( Hear, hear, and laughter.)
Mr. J. KENNEDY (we understood) believed that the
present measure would be more unpalatable to the Dissenters
than that of the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) last year.—
( Hear, hear, and laughter from the Ministerial benches.) The
objections which the Dissenters entertained to that Bill affected
only its details—such as the necessity of a publication of the
bans and a connection with the Establishment by the mode' of
registration proposed ; the present measure was objectionable
in detail—it went to draw a line of demarcation - between the
Dissenters and the members of the Church—to establish two
kinds of marriages, one of a civil and one of a religious cha-
racter,—and to degrade the Dissenting clergy by placing
them in a position of inferiority, of which they would justly
complain. '

Sir R. PEEL rose to notice a few' observatiens which had
been made on the proposed measure, which appeared to him
calcnlated,to prejudice it in the eyes of the Dissenters, and
said that he never felt more satisfied than he did now that he
could convince every rational and impartial body of DisienterS
that there was nothing in the Bill calculated to make any invi-
dious distinction between them and the members of the Esta-
blished Church ; and that there was no one single clause in
it, which, if it did make such a distinction, made any other
than one which was inseparable from the nature of dissent,
and the nature of the required remedy. He wished to acknow-
ledge in the first place the fair and liberal spirit in which
the plan had been received by the House, and to state
Hs conviction that no observation had been made with
a view to, prejudice in any, manner the progress of th
Bill. What was the object of the measure which he had
proposed? There had been complaints made by the Dis-
senters of practical grievances, to remove which it was
his duty to endeavour to discover a practical and effectual
remedy.--( Hear,. hear.) Then the course which he had pur-
sued was the most natural which he could take to attain that
object. He had read the speeches which had`' been made on

the Bill 'of last session ; he had looked carefully at the
petitions which had been presented with reference to this sub-
ject ; he had weighed all the objections which had been urged
against former measures ; and the conclusion to which he had
come, after the fullest consideration, was, that the provision
of the present Bill with regard to marriage must tend to
satisfy the wishes of the sensible and rational portion of the
Dissenters, while it paid due respect to the religious feel-
ings of the members of the Church of England. His con-
viction was, that, with respect to marriage, the members of the
Church of England were satisfied with the existing law.—
( Hear.) There might, perhaps, be some individual members
of it who were anxious to have marriage made a purely civil con-
tract ; but looking at the great mass of the community, he
was satisfied that neither on the part of the members of the
Church of England nor on the part of the Dissenters, did
there exist any objection to the observance of the ceremony of
marriage, so far as the Members of the Church were con-
cerned. He thought, therefore, that it did savour of that re-
ligious intolerance which the Dissenters appeared so strongly to
condemn, that their advocates in that House should say, " We
not only require relief for ourselves from those hardships which
press so severely and unjustly upon us, but we think it our
makingduty to insist upon your such alterations in the cere -
mony of marriage of the Chum% of England as may be neces-
sary to accommodate it to our notions of the grievances under
which we labour."—( Cheers.) So far from wishing to place
the Dissenters on a different footing from the members of the
Church of England, his first wish had been to make mar-
riage, as regarded all sects and religions, a religious ceremony.
His earnest wish now was that it should be a religious cere-
mony ; but he saw great, and, he believed, insurmountable
obstacles, to the attainment of that object. —( Hear,
hear.) If he had observed, and laid down in the proposed
Bill a material difference between the Dissenters and the
Members of the Church,—he had been compelled
to adopt this course, from the variance which had ex-
isted between the circumstances of these two classes of the
community, and not from any desire to subject the Dissenters
to any degrading or invidious distinctions.—( Hear, hear.)
What was the nature of the Established Church ? The
members of it professed certain principles, and adhered to
certain doctrines ; it was easy, therefore, to prescribe for those
who belonged to it the unanimous observance of some one
form of contracting the relation of marriage. Upon the same
principle, if the House had only to legislate for some one
body of the Dissenters—say the Presbyterians or the Inde-
pendents—there would be no difficulty in laying it down as a
rule that the performance of the religious ceremony should be
sufficient evidence of the existence of time civil contract.—
( Hear, hear.) The Dissenters, he belieied, entertained dif-
ferent opinions with regard to the ceremony of marriage ;
and it was because he was convinced that this variance existed,
and because he knew that a great number of different deno-
minations of Dissenters existed in this country, that he, wish-
ing to pay that respect which was due to their religious feel-
ings, and not to do any thing which would tend to prevent
them from adhering to their tenets, shrunk from introducing
into his Bill any one form to which all would be bound to
subscribe.—( Cheers.) There were, too, some classes of Dis-
senters—such, for instance, as that of the Quakers—who
observed no religious ceremony, and who entered into the
relation of marriage as a civil contract. How, then, could any
measure be introduced prescribing one form-of religious cere-
mony for all, without being justly open to the objection of
being distinguished by the strongest spirit of intolerance to-
wards that body of Dissenters to whom he had just alluded ?
( Hear, hear.) How was it possible to frame an Act of Par-
liament so as to meet the wishes of the various Dissenting
bodies upon this point, and providing at the same time for one
mode only of performing the ceremony of marriage ? It was,
then, the force of circumstances and the nature of the law, and
not any wish to place the Dissenters upon an unfair footing
with the members of the Church of England, which left him no
other course to take but that which he had adopted.—( Hear.)
It might be said, however, that the observance of this ceremony
might be accommodated to the views of three or four of the
leading denominations of Dissenters • but if he, acting on the
opinions of those few classes of the Dissenters, brought forward
in the most conciliatory spirit any measure embracing their
suggestions, it might be fairly met by the advocates cf the
other sects, whose wishes he had not consulted, with this re-
monstrance—" We have a right to share in the benefits of that

principle of toleration which you have acceded to in the case o
others, and upon which we require protection for our preju.
dices, or at any rate for our natural and
.just feelings."—
( Hear.) With respect to the objection which had been urged
against the present measure, upon the ground that every
teacher, minister, or preacher, should, as a necessary con-
sequence of his taking such a religious office, be entitled to
perform the civil contract; lie thought that the adoption of
such a principle as that laid down by the opposite must be
attended with the most inconvenient results, and could be
acted upon only in an intolerant spirit, inasmuch as though
the Government would have no right to inquire into the ca-
pabilities of ally individual to perform the religious duties of
his ministry, it would have the right, ;when he became a
civil functionary, of inquiring into his qualifications for the
Office.—( Hear, hear.) The Government -was not called upon
to interfere with the ignorant man in the performance of the
religious duties of any appointment which he might hold, but
they were bound to deprive him of the pi wer of performing
the ceremony of marriage as a civil contract, and attended,
as such, by all its legitimate consequence s.--( Hear.) As
he had before said, his first wish was that m.arriage should be
made a religious ceremony ; but he had been obliged, from the
circumstances to which he had referred, to fall back upon the
intended provision in his Bill, which, whilst it did not prevent
the Dissenter in n having marriage performed according to
the rites of his particular persuasion, required at the same
time the acknowledgment of the obligation of the contract
before a Magistrate.—( Hear, hear.) As to registration, he
thought Hon. Members had displayed considerable ingenuity
in the objections which they had urged against the proposed
measure on this point. The Dissenter was not brought by the
proposed measure into any contact with the Minister of the
Established Church, as regarded his religious opinions, but
merely registered his marriage according to the present sys-
tem of registration, which he (the Chancellor of the Exche=
quer) thought the best. The House, however, was not
thereby precluded from considering whether any beneficial al-

teration might not be effected in the present mode of registra-
tion. With respect to the amount of the fees to be paid to
the clergyman, he would only observe, that in every Bill
which had been introduced on this subjeet the claims for com-
pensation, on the part of the clergyman, had never been re-
sisted. He had made those observations, ;not so much for the
purpose of replying to those who had urges 1 slight objections
against the proposed measure, as because .he was anxious to
remove the impression which might remain o n the mind of the
Dissenters if those objections had gone forth unnoticed or un-
answered.—( Cheers.)
The motion was then agreed to.
OMNIBUSES AND HACKNEY CARRIAGES.

Mc. Alderman WOOD moved for leave to bring in a Bill
for the better regulation of Cabriolet and other Hackney
Coaches, or of OMnibuses and other Stage Coaches, for short
distances, used in and near the Metropolis, and of the drivers
and attendants thereof.

Colonel SIBTHORPE supported the motion.
Mr. ROEBUCK opposed it.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said that property had dete-
riorated from Charing-cross to the Bank of late years, in con-
sequence of carriages being unable to stop with convenience at
any warehouse or shop, in consequence of the confusion created
by the omnibuses and cabriolets.

Dr. BOWRING expressed his conviction that the superin-
tendence of the magistrates would be sufficient' to remedy the
evil complained of.
Sir T. FREMANTLE thought that some legislative
enactment on the subject might be very beneficial.
Sir J. WROTTESLEY thought there was as much dan-
ger from the driving of carriages of other descriptions as from
that of cabriolets and omnibuses.

Mr. WARBURTON was of opinion. that the assemblage
of carriages before the doors of the principal shops was a
greater obstruction than that complained ot;
Mr. CLAY admitted that Parliament occasionally ex-
hibited too great a fondness for petty legislation, but did not
think that the present case was a ease liable to that censure.
Mr. GLADSTONE trusted that the worthy Alderman
would not be prevented by clamour from proceeding with his
proposition.

Mr. Alderman WOOD did not wish to curtail in the
slightest degree the privileges of the people ; he merely
wished to regulate what he was quite ready to allow would
be, if regulated, a great public convenience.
Leave was then granted to bring in the Bill.
MERCHANT SEAMEN.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM did not anticipate any objection
to the bringing in of the Bill for which he was about to move.
The first measure which he should propose was to amend and
consolidate the laws relating to the merchant seamen of the
United Kingdom, and to form and maintain a register of all
the men engaged in that service. This was almost the same
measure as that which he had introduced last year. The prin-
cipal object in view being to render the mercantile navy the
means of manning the royal navy when required—the first
step was to protect the seamen of the mercantile navy
from evils to which they were 'at present exposed. He
intended to propose that all seamen, whether employed in
the coast or in foreign trade, when they embarked with
the master of a merchant-vessel, should. do so under a
written agreement. Having thus protected the men, he
should proceed to protect the masters from some evils
under which they at present laboured; especially against
the harbouring of deserters from their ships in other vessels.
He should then proceed to re-enact the law at present exist-
ing with respect to the number of apprentices; and he in-
tended to provide that ships in the foreign trade should, on
their return to an English port, be visited by the Custom-
house officers, and that their apprentices and seamen should
bd mustered and accounted for, under heavy penalties. This
would in a great measure obviate the hardships to which mer-
chant-seamen were frequently exposed, by being, in conse-
quence of frivolous disputes with the master, left in foreign
countries with large •arrears of wages due to them. By
the last part of his measure, he hoped' to secure an efficient
registration of all the seamen of the mercantile navy. He
had endeavoured to obviate the objections which had been
made to the Bill of last session, and had availed himself of
many of the suggestions which had been thrown out, espe-
cially by the late Member for the City of London. Instead
of the regulations contained in the of last session, re-
specting muster-rolls in every ship, he had substituted a
mode of return less voluminous and less inconvenient, to be
made by masters of coasting vessels half yearly, and by mas-
ters of vessels engaged in the foreign trade on their return
home ; all through the Custom-house. He had every reason
to believe that this regulation would not be found onerous on
the ship-owners. He had now gone through the principal pro-
visions of his first measure ; and would proceed shortly to de-
scribe his second, which was for the encouragement of the vo-
luntary enlistment of seamen, and for makiug regulations for
more effectually manning his Majesty's navy. Last session,
when lie introduced a Bill on the subject, he was very sanguine
'in his belief that a system of registration might be substituted
for impressment, in consequence of an analogy which he then
believed to exist between that system and the existing system
of balloting for the militia. Further reflection, however, had
convinced him that such analogy did not exist; and that any
regulations founded on its supposed existence would be either
illusory and inefficient, in consequence of their mildness ; or
that if efficient, they would be impressment under another
name, and in a more severe character. The circumstances
attending the registration of a land force and the registra-
tion of a sea force were essentially different. The demand
for militia men was small, and, the -supply was great.
When a' ballot took place for the militia, the men on whom
the lot fell were resident on the spot, and were therefore
ready immediately to serve either in person or by sub-
stitute. Directly the reverse would be the case with
the sea force. Supposing that seamen were registered and
balloted for, such were the circumstatsces of the seafaring po- ,
pulation, that so far from the greatek number of that popula-
tion being within the realm; two-thirds would be on the waters,
absent from home, and not available for the public service.
As the ballotted men would not be forthcoming, it would be
necessary, in cases of emergency, to have recourse to the men
who had escaped the ballot, which would be a double hard-
ship. What then did he propose to do ? He proposed, in the
first place, to declare that the, Crown had a right to the ser-
vices in time of war of all seafaring men. In the next
place, he proposed to limit those services. First, with re-
spect to their duration. He meant to propose that the ser-
vice should in no case exceed five years in duration, and
that having served five years, should always be a protec-
tion to a seaman against being called upon for further ser-
vice. Having done that, het was desirous, with a view to
consult the kelings of those who were anxious, if pos-
sible, to avoid all compulsory service, to exhaust every
inducement to voluntary enlistment. He meant, therefore,
to provide that before his Majesty, in the event of war,
should be empowered by proclamation to compel the
service of merchant-seamen in the royal navy, a period of
grace should •be allowed to elapse, during which all sea-
men who entered voluntary for five years should receive
a double bounty. Last war the bounty was 51.—lie proposed
that it should be 101. He proposed also that such volun-
teers
should sooner derive the benefit of a pension ; and that
during war, one year of voluntary service should reckon for
two years of service in peace, or of cumpulsory service. He
proposed, likewise, that if the war exceeded five years in du-
ration, at the expiration of that period, a seaman, whether
serving compulsory or as a volunteer, should be entitled, if he
chose to enter for five years more, to receive a bounty of .5/.
He also proposed that a seaman Who had served twenty years,
and was entitled to a pension, should be allowed to draw both,
which was the cause of the frequent loss of some of the best
men in the navy. He luiped the House would be induced to
sanction those propositions as strong inducements to seafaring
men voluntarily to enter into the King's service in time of
war ; although at the same time he thought it highly expedi-
ent to retain the power of impressment, were it only with the -
view of increasing those inducements. He hoped he should
be allowed to bring in his Bills, and at a future opportunity he
should be happy to afford any more detailed explanation of
their provisions that might be required. At present he was
unwilling to trespass further on the indulgence of the House,
and would at once move for leave to bring in Bills in confor-
mity to this notice.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG begged to express his heartfelt grati-
fication at the announcement made that evening, and to bear
his testimony in favour of the plan developed by the Right
Hon. Baronet as the right one, for the accomplishment of
what he knew had for years been the object of his wishes--
the abolition of the practice of impressment. When the sub-
ject was brought before the House last session, be took the
liberty of stating that the mere introduction of a system of
registration, unaccompanied by some plan as a substitute for
impressment, would neither be satisfactory to those who were
to be under the operation of the law, nor conduce to the at-
tainment of the object the Right Hon. Baronet had in view.
He was glad to see that the Right Hon. Baronet had united
these objects in an intelligible form, and in a way which would
be satisfactory to all parties. He spoke not without knowing
the feelings of the brave body of men to be affected by these
Bills ; and on a recent occasion he was placed in contact witi