The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-27 00:00:00

NO MORE MEDICINE

Price 2d., free by post, a popular treatise, sixty-four Pazeo.
THE NATURAL REGENERATION of the DIGESTIVE

ORGANS,
practically illustrating the effectual Cure, without Medicine,
of Indigestion (dyspepsia), habitual Constipation, Flatulency
Acidity, Palpitation of the Heart, Torpidity of the Liver,
bilons Headaches, Nervousness, Biliousness, General Debi-
Ity, Cough, Asthma, Consumption, Despondency, Spleen, &c.,
without Pills, Purgatives, or Medicine of any kind, by a
simple, pleasant, and infallible means; adapted to the gerie'ral
reader. London : Barry Du Barry & Co.. 77, Regent-street.

THE SECRET GUIDE TO HEATIFYI AND
HAPPINESS. A MEDICAL WORK. Post free,
on receipt of two penny stamps, direct from No. 19,
Berners-street, Oxford-street, Illustrated with 100 opinions
of Valpeau, Lallemand, Roux, Ricord, &c. It gives
engravings, containing the instructions for the perfect re-
storation of those who are pre- vented by impediments from
entering into the married state, also showing the dreadful
results from early abuse, gonorrhoea and syphilis, and the
benefits arising from the chemical tests and the examination
of the spermatoza by the newly-constructed microscope,
with powerful lenses, and containing a valuable prescription
of lotion to prevent infection.

NEW AND IMPORTANT DISCOVERY IN THE
SCIENCE OF MEDICINE.

- -
Patent Office Seal of Great Britain. Diplome de l'Ecole de
Pharmacie Pharmacies Paris. Imperial College of Me-
dicine, Vienna.
The Patentee has confided the preparation of these Medi-
ines to a Physician of the Royal University of Erlangen,
and Member of the Royal College of Surgeons of England
(who is registered under the New Medical Act) and attends
daily at No. 19, Berners-street, Oxford-street, London, be-
tween the hours of 11 and 2, and from 5 till 8 (Sundays ex-
cepted), in order to advise Patients on their Diseases and
Treatment, and thus add to the speedy certainty of Cure.
TRIESEMAR Nos. 1,,2, and 3, prepared in the form of a
lozenges. devoid of taste or smell, and can be carried in the
waistosat pocket. Sold in tin cases, divided into separate
doses, adapted for both sexes.
TRIESEIVIAR No. 1 is a Remedy for RELAXA-
TION, SPERMATORRHcEA, and all the distressing con-
sequences arising from early abuse, indiscriminate excesses,
or too long residence in hot climates. It has restored bodily
and sexual strength and vigour to thousands of debilitated
Individuals who are now in the enjoyment of health and the
Functions of Manhood: and whatever may be the cause for
DISQUALIFICATIONS for MARRIAGE they are effectu-
ally subdued by this Wonderful Discovery
TRIESEMAR NO. IT.

effectually, in the short space of three days, completely and
entirely eradicates all traces of Gonorrhoea, both in its mild
and anravated forms, Gleets, Strictures, Irritation of the
Bladder, Non-retention of Urine, Pains of the Loins and
Kidneys, and those disorders which so often ruin the health
of a vast portion of the population.

_
TRIES'EMAR NO. HT.
Is the great Continental Remedy for Syphilis and Secon-
dary Symptoms : it constitutes a certain cure for Scurvy,
Scrofula, and all Cutaneous Eruptions, removing all impu-
rities from the vital stream, so as altogether to eradicate
the virus of disease, and expel it through the medium of the
repos of the skin and urine, and is a remedy for that class
of disorders which unfortunately the English Physician
treats with Mercury, to the destruction of the patient's con-
reststituti no, and which all the sarsaparilla in the world cannot
ore.
Price 4s. "---.. (by post ss. 6d) and lls., sent direct
•
feom the establishment, 10, Berners-street, Oxford-street,
London (free by post ls. Bd. extra, to any part of the
United Kingdom: or four cases in one for 338., by
post 35. 2d. extra), which saves lls , and in £5 cases,
, upon receipt of Post-Office Order,
,5, parringdon-street ; R. Howden, 78,
saving of £1 12s.
, payablo
to Medicus, and a statement of the case, the Medicines will be
sent by return of post. To be had also of Barclay and Sons,
street; Bartlett Hooper 43• Ki
trona London-bridge) - 43+ King William-street (four doors
Gracechurch-

ALBERT LIFE ASSURANCE and
GUARANTEE COMPANY. Established 1838.
Chief Office—No. 7, Waterloo-place, Pall-mall, London, S.W.
Extracts from the Report of the Board of Directors pre-
sented to the SharehoMers at the Annual General Meeting,
held on the 30th June, 1359:
Rear-Admiral the Rt. Hod. Lord GEORGE PAULET, C. 8.,
in the Chair.
LIFE DEPAR.TMENT.
During the year 1858 proposals were received for assurances
to the extent of £395,430, and 768 policies were issued for
£230,177, producing an additional annual income of £7,611 2s.
GUARANTEE DEPARTMENT.
In this branch 1,082 proposals were made for guarantees to
the amount of £280,460, and 708 policies were granted for
£177,335, producing a further annual income of £2,226 2s. 3d.
On the 31st December, 1858, the total income of the Com-
pany was upwards of £117,000 a-year, and the number of life
policies in force exceeded £13,000, covering assurances to the
amount of £3,204,819.
From Professor De Morgan's Report upon the Valuation of
Liabilities, and the statements of accounts read to the Meet-
ing, it appeared that, on the 31st December, 1858, the surplus
in favour of the Company, after providing for every liability,
was £192,925 2s. 11d.
BALANCE :SHEET Di 31ST PECDVER, 1858.
LIABILITIES.
To liabilities under policies according to Professor De Mor-
gan's valuati9n as under, namely :
Present value of £2,358,912 on single lives with
profits
Present value of 413,919 on single lives with-
out profits....
Present value of 86,998 endowment assur-
eine with profits
Present value of 32,759 endowment assur-
ances without
profits
Present value of 132,562 on joint lives with
profits
Present value of 20,799 on joint lives without
profits
Present value of 128,870 endowments of chil-
dren and other
assurances
To amount reserved for annuities , .
. 54 833 0 0

£3,204,819 £1,331,76 F 0 0
To proprietors for paid-up capital
To depositors and other accounts .. 31,518 •5 7
To reversionary department 14,587 8 6
To suspense account 4,802 16 0
* To proprietors in the Bank
of London and National Pro-
vincial Insurance AsSociation
for balance of their capital to
be paid off by three yearly in-
stalments, commencing Jan-
uary, 1860
To other liabilities on account
of the said association 44,359 3 4
167,696 7 0
To balance in favour of the company carried
down 192,925 2 11

£1,821,899 0 0
* This liability of £123,337 3s. Bd. has been reduced to
£84,956 3s Bd. by shares paid off or exchanged since the 31st of
December, 1858.

ASSETS.
By present value of the Company's assets under policies, ac-
cording to Professor De Morgan's valuation, as under, viz.:—
Present value 0f£75,497 9 6 per annum on
single lives, with profits ....£1,092,558 0 0
Present value of 15,260 15 7 per annum on
single lives, without profits 183,193 0 0
Present value of 3,975 0 4 per annum on
endowment as- surances, with-
profits
Present value of 1,560 19 4 per annum on
endowment as- surances, with-
out profits
Present value of 6,300 7 6 per annum on
joint lives, with profits.... 80,591 0 0
Present value of 1,005 6 3 per annum on
joint lives, without profits 14,289 0 0
Present value of 3,751 12 11 endowments of
children, and other assurances 27,574 0 0

£107,351 11
.5

By investments, as under, viz. :
On mortgages X 51,307 17 2
On reversions 37,216 0 0
On bonds and other securities 49,401 18 10
Re-purchasable annuities 10,129 4 6
Cash, agents' balances, and
other assets

38,951 15 3

By assets transferred from the Bank of Lon-
don and National Provincial Insurance As-
surance Association, viz.:—
Mortgages £44,296 2 9
Bonds and other securities 103,117 6 6
Freehold and leasehold pro-
perty
Amount payable by Liverpool
and London Company

178,917 4 3

£1,8.21,899 0 0

By balance in favour of the Company
brought down ' £192,925 2 11
HENRY WILLIAM SMITH,
Actuary and Secretary.

MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE/S
SISTER.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
SIR,--The Committee of the Marriage Law Reform Associa-
tion are desirous of Submitting to the attention of the British
public the following "Facts and Opinions," tending to Drove
the Scriptural lawfulness of marriage with a deceased wife's
sister, and the necessity of legalising. such marriages in Eng.
land, in accordance with the law and practice of other Chris-
tian countries.

JOSEPH STANSBURY, M.A., lion. Sec.
21, Parliament-street, June 20, 1859.

FACTS and OPINIONS TENDING to PROVE the NE-
CESSITY of LEGALISING MARRIAGE with a DE-
CEASED WIFE'S SISTER.
" The Bible, the Bible only, is the religion of Protestants.
Whatsoever else they believe beside it, and the plain irrefra-
gable, indubitable consequences of it, well may they hold it as
a matter of opinion. I will take no man's liberty of judgment
from him ; neither shall any man take mine from me."—
Chillingworth.
" Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny. In such a coun-
try tui this, they are of all bad things the worst—worse by
far than anywhere else ; and they derive a peculiar malignity
from the wisdom and soundness of the rest of our institu-
tions."—Burke.

FACTS.
Fact 1. Marriage with a deceased wife's sister is no where
prohibited, whether expressly or impliedly, either in the Old
or New Testament.

Fact 2.• Marriage with a wife's sister is expressly legislated
for in Leviticus, xviii., 18, and there the prohibition is strictly
limited to the lifetime of the wife.

Fact 3. The Jews, to whom, in their own language, the
sacred oracles were given, have always understood this mar-
riage to havelbeeniimpliedly permitted in Levit. xviii., 18, and
set a special mark of approbation on such unions, by allowing
them to take place when there were young children within a
shorter interval after the death of the wile than in ordinary
cases.
Fact 4. This marriage was never prohibited by the laws of
any country in the world before the fourth century of the
Christian Era.
Fact 5. None of the Six General Councils, held between
A.D. 325 and A.D. 680, condemned this marriage.
Fact 6. During the first 500 years of the Christian Era this
marriage was condemned by only one provincial council, that
of Eliberis in Spain, composed of 19 Bishops. This council
tahl so ftohreb
saic3li
rt
iatpa e
or
fs
ttho
ehe
Saintslighted m inh
might
cemeteriesi
spa
rthheed,day
dt
re-
quired bishops, priests, and deacons to live apart from their
wives.
Fact 7. The Roman Catholic Church does not regard this
marriage as forbidden in Scripture.
Fact 8. The Church of England nowhere claims authority to
prohibit any marriage not contrary to Holy Scripture.
Fact 9. Neither the common nor the statute law of the
other
mr
pprrinohciipblietsthanany marriageontta alleged o r
o
kindred
contrariety
ytoh
affinitytelaw o
on a nyf
God.
Fact 10. Protestant Dissenters regard the prohibition of
this marriage as unscriptural and inexpedient, the deputies
of the three denominations having repeatedly petitioned Par-
liament for its removal.
Fact 11. This marriage may be lawrully celebrated in every
country in the world except England and Ireland, and one
canton of Switzerland.
Fact 12. This marriage was virtually permitted in this
country before 1835.
Fact 13. Neither in this nor in any other country has it been
shown that the permission of this marriage has been at-
tended with injurious consequences.
marriage in En
land is a recent innovation, dating only from the year 1835.
Fact 14. The absolute prohibition of this marria g-
tanta
Fact 15. The Act of 1835 was an unjustifiable Nmpramise,
the majority of the House of Commons reluc ly consen
t-
ing to the fliture prohibition of marriage with a decea
wife's sister as the means of procuring the legalisation of all
past marriages of the kind.
Fact 16. The Bench of Bishops on that occasion consented
to legalise marriage with a deceased wife's sister previously
celebrated—a measure to which it was impossible they should
have assented had they believed the marriage contrary to the
Word of God.
Fact 17. The Parliament of 1835 purposely avoided touch-
ing on the question of what marriages ought to be prohibited,
reserving that important question for future consideration.
Fact 18. The Royal Commissioners on the Law of Marriage
declare that the Act of 1835 has not secured. the respect or
obedience of society.
Fact 19. Thousands of such marriages have been contracted;
they are found in every town and neighbourhood in the king-
dom.
Fact 20. Society, almost without exception, regards such
persons as rightly married, and worthy of respect, and in so
doing condemns the law which declares their marriage void.
Fact 21. Twenty-one Spiritual Peers have declared it to be
their opinion that there is no Scriptural prohibition of these
marriages.
Fact 22. Numerous clergymen of the Church of England
have petitioned for the removal of this restriction.
Fact 23. Eleven Deans, and more than 300 other clergymen
of the Established Church in Ireland, have expressed &deci-
ded opinion that this marriage is not prohibited in Scripture.
Fact 24. The principal persons in the city of London, and
in almost every large town in the kingdom, have repeatedly
petitioned against the existing law.
Fact 25. Many persona of the highest distinction in both
Houses of Parliament have voted for this measure.
Fact 26. The House of Commons, in 31 divisions, have voted
for repealing the existing' law.
Fact 27. Three hundred and forty-six members of the late
House of Commons voted for legalising marriage with a de-
ceased wife's sister.

OPINIONS.
" We consider that the feeling against these marriages is in
a great measure founded rather on a vague and uninformed
assumption that they are prohibited by God's word, than on
a mature examination either of the Scriptures or the law of
the Church." `: We do not find that the persons who con-
tract these marriages, and the relations and friends who ap-
prove them, have a less strong sense than others of religious
and moral obligation, or are marked by laxity of conduct.
" These marriages will take place when a concurrence of cir-
cumstances give rise to mutual attachment ; they are not de-
pendent on legislation."—Report of Royal Commissioners,
signed by the Bishop of Lichfield, Mr. Stuart Wortley, Dr.
Lushing,ton, Mr. Blake, Justice Williams, and Lord Advocate
Rutherfurd.

" It seems to be established and admitted, that the moral
feeling of the community at large is not with this law—that
sons, not considering themselves tocommit
the law, in fact, is not obeyed, and*that a greatnumber ofper
any moral offence,
do contract marriages which the law prohibits. That is not

a state of things which ought to exist ; and not being of
opinion that there is any moral objection to the contracting
of these marriages, and believing that the law as it stands is
the cause of a great deal of misery and social evil, especially
among the middle and lower classes of the community, I shall
with great pleasure give my vote for the motion."—Speech of
Lord Palmerston.
"I must say that I have satisfied myself that there is not
any religious prohibition of these marriages." "It is a mis-
fortune that the feeling of relationship which takes place by
marriage should be weakened by any alteration of the law of'
marriage. But, while I admit that, on the one hand, I think
that there is a great and practical evil which we cannot very
well refrain from remedying. The evil is not among the
upper classes of society ; but there is no doubt, partly among
the middle classes, and much more among the lower classes,
a feeling that, after the death of the wife, there is often no
person so fit to take care of the children as the beloved sister
of that wife." "It is not, perhaps, in a great number of cases
that these marriages would be contracted; but I think where
persons feel that they can without scrnplecontract them, that
they should be allowed to do so."—Speech of Lord John
Russell, M.P. °
" I cannot bring myself to believe that the Divine law pro-
hibits a man from marriage with a deeeased wife's sister."—
Archbishop of York.
"I will undertake to say that in no part of the civilised
world is there to be found a more moral and intelligent people,
especially in regard to the intercourse of the sexes—than are
the people of the State of Massachusetts ; and yet, my Lords,
in that State the marriages which the noble lord seeks to
legalise are consistent with the law. They are not only legal,
but they are of constant occurrence."—Speech of Lord Lynd-
hurst.
" Chafin, that bath married two sisters, upon his appeal
from your Grace and me, hangeth still before the delegates,
and, as much as I can perceive, is not likely, to take any great
hurt at their hands. 1 would they would decree it were law-
ful to marry two sisters, so should the world be out of doubt,
as now it is passed away in a mockery."--Bishop Jewell, in a
letter to Archbishop Parker, dated June, 1563. From the
original in the Archiepiscopal Palace, Lambeth. (This opinion
of Bishop Jewell was given two years after the adverse
opinion so often quoted.)
"The view which he had heard taken in that House respect-
ing the operation of Scripture, must after all be a mere matter
of inference and construction, and, applying himself to that
view of the subject, he should say that such marriages as the
Bill was intended to legalise were not prohibited, but were
tacitly permitted by the words of the chapter which had been
so often quoted. He protested against thoopinions expressed
by those who contended that there existed any Divine pro-
hibition."—Bishop of St. David's Speech, 1851.
" The Scriptures should be the rt.* of life as well as of
faith, and, as I can find nothing thaf. nJlitates against such
-marriages, I feel hound to oppose any preposition that inter-'
feres with the liberty of the subject."—Rev. Sir Erasmus
Williams, Bart., M.A., Chancellor of St. David's.
"The prohibition of taking two sisters was meant for the
lifetime only."—Milton.
"The context also seems to suggest a more literal interpre-
tation. namely, the marrying of two sisters together. This
verse (Leviticus xviii. 18) seems not to contain a prohibition
of it (viz., marriage with a deceased wife's sister). Such re-
strictions as pride, covetousness, or human policy have super-
added, do not seem to have proved beneficial to mankind."—
Scott.
" With regard to the Scriptural argument, it would ill be-
come him to give a confident opinion upon it, when he found
the Right Rev. Prelates having considerable doubt, and no
small discrepancy among themselves."—Speech of Lord
Brougham.
"I have an amendment to move to the second clause—it is,
' That there be excepted from the operation of the Bill, cases
of marriage with the sister of a deceased wife where there is
a child or children under 12 years of age.' There can be no
doubt that there are many cases in which it may be of essential
importance both to the father and the children that such a
marriage should be permitted."—Speech of J. P. Plumptre,
Esq., M.P., 1835.
" The amendment proposed by the honourable Member is
one of very great importance, but I fear that, at this period
of the Session, it would be impossible to bestow upon it the
consideration to which it is entitled. Perhaps the better
course to adopt would be not, to interfere with the Bill, by
persevering with this amendment, but to propose next Ses-
sion a short Act upon the subject to which it refers."—Speech
of Dr. Lushington, following- Mr. Plumptre, 1835.
" Is the marriage of a widower with his late wife's sister
within the 'prohibited degrees?" In all frankness and
honesty I am obliged to answer—No. It is interdicted neither
by express veto, nor yet by implication. Canonical austerity
is not to be identified with moral purity or matrimonial
fidelity."—Rev. Dr. Eadie, Professor of Biblical Literature to
the United Presbyterian Church, Scotland.
"It appears to me, therefore, that first, as Scripture shows
that there is nothing immoral in such a connexion ; and se-
condly, as it is obvious that much evil would be prevented—
many poor children saved from misery and ruin by having
that person over them who, in -a majority of instances, would
be the next best substitute for a mother, my own mind is led
to believe that the law of man ought to tally in this respect
with the law of God."—Rev. Canon Champneys.
" But has it never occurred to you, my dear Wynn, that this
law is an abominable relic of ecclesiastical tyranny ? Of all
second marriages I have no hesitation in saying that these are
the most suitable, and likely to be the most frequent, if the
law did not sometimes prevent them. It is quite monstrous,
judges and lawyers speaking as they have done of late, upon
this subject."—Robert Southey. •
" I have never heard upon what principle of policy the law
was made prohibiting the marriage of' a man with his wife's
sister, nor have I ever been able to conjecture any political in-
convenience that might have been found in such marriages, or
to conceive any moral turpitude in them."—Dr. Benjamin
Franklin.
" Having again carefully examined the question and con-
sulted some of the highest authorities in Hebrew literature as
to the meaning of the Scripture passages, I am confirmed in
the opinion formerly expressed, that marriage'with a deceased
wife's sister is not only not prohibited, `either expressly or
by implication,' but that, according to Leviticus xviii., 18
(concerning the translation of which there is dot the least un-
certainty), such marriage is plainly' allowed."—Rev. Alexander
M`Caul, D.D., Professor of Divinity and Hebrew Literature in

King—'s„ College, London.
" Are you of opinion that there is any prohibition in Scrip-
ture against such marriages ?"—"No ; I am quite satisfied to
the contrary."—Evidence of Rev. J. Garbett.
" People in general do not consider such marriages impro-
per. They cannot be proved to be improper by Scripture. The
question is therefore one of expediency, and my experience as
a parochial minister induces me to think the measure expe-
dient. On these grounds, it ever a Convocation be called, and
elected one of the proctors, I shall move for an alteration
in this regard in the table of kindred antlaffinity. Until this
be the case I shall be glad to see such marriages legalised by
the civil rite."—Dr. Hook, Dean of Chichester.
" From all I have been able to learn on the question
whether a man may marry a deceased wife's sister,' my
opinion is, that neither does Holy Scripture anywhere forbid
it, nor ever did the Jews."—Rev. Dr. Lee, late Professor of
Hebrew in the University of Cambridge.
" Were the prohibitions founded on Scripture we ought, at
whatever sacrifice, to obey God rather than man; but I cannot
see the expediency of a law which,ihaving no such sanction, is
observed only by the scrupulous, evaded by the wealthy, and
defied or disregarded by the poor."—Rev. Canon Dale.
" It is not only not considered as prohibited, but it is dis-
tinctly understood to be permitted ; and on this point neither
the Divine law, nor the Rabbis, nor historical Judaism, leaves
room for the least doubt. I can only reiterate my former as-
sertions that all sophistry must split on the clear and unequi-
vocal words, Lev. xviii., 18, •in her life time.' "—Evidence of
Dr. Adler, the Chief Rabbilof the Jews in England.
" This text, expressed in this manner, shows that it is not
permitted to have as wives two sisters at the same time, as
Jacob had Rachel and Leah, but only in succession ; and this
is the sense which appears the most clear and the most prob-
able. • . . Analogy is not always a means of judging re-
specting positive laws." —Calmet.
" He as -ed them to reflect that the parting request'of many
a dying wife was that the man should marry her sister, which
was the best testimony to the feeling of woman in this matter.
Such marriages were not repugnant to nature nor to Scrip-
ture ; and if they did but look calmly at these facts, sure he
was that the day was not far distant when the obnoxious law
would be repealed,"—Speech of the Rev..S. C. Miller, D.D.
prac-
tice of the commonwealth by tho Jews a ntan was
"Within the meaning of Leviticus, and the constant
to marry his wife's sister only during her life; after he
might—so the tdxt is. This perhaps is a /not not easily un-
tied, how the Levitical degrees are God'i law in this king-
dom, but not as they were in the commonwealth of Israel,
when first given."—Chief Justice Vaughan. prohibited
"As no clear and strong case has been made out of impor-
tant advantage to the public from such restriction, I take my
stand on the roadb general principle, that every restriction is
an evil in itself,--the burden of proof lyi upon the advocates
of any restriction to show its necessity'
. "You
are at liberty to refer to me as approving of .the abolition of
the restriction on marriage to which you allude."—Archbp•
offermarr
accountayeos
fospwhi
onhuldnh, t
such
ukh
ceahtp,
marriagesta
cheeo l o isceael
mlnyoa,
Whately, in a letter to G. A. Crowder, E.
"I speak advisedly when I say that 'I
come here prepared to
Evidence of Rev. J. Hatehard. yig ground
notoi sun
be
ew correctlhe whatsoever tats
legalised."—
Evidence sa
evt
de sr:: on

"In the Indies—if a husband has lost his wife, he does not
fail to marry her sister; and this is extreme y natural, for his
new consort becomes the mother of her sister's children, and
not a cruel step-mother."—Montesquieu.
" I admit that a marriage with a wife's sister is not forbid-
den in Leviticus."—Bishop of Lincoln (Dr. Kay).
"Has never had occasion to observe, either in the mid-
dling or poorer classes, any injury or immorality arising from
such marriages ; never admonished he any of those parties
that they were acting in breach of the divine law, because
never believed it. The great inducement to these marriages
that these parties have a better opportunity than is gene-
rally afforded of being acquainted with each other's real cha-
racter and disposition. "—Evidence of the Rev. J. F. Denham,
M.A., F.R.S.
Such marriages, I apprehend, are nearly as frequent as
the circumstances which usually gave rise to them. I have
not known any social disadvantages attending them."—
Bishop M'llvane, United States.
"I do not know—l never heard of any social disadvantages
attending such marriages of any description whatever, and
am totally at a loss to conjecture what disadvantages' can
be referred to."—Rev. J. L. Pomroy, United States.
" As far as you know, the general moral feeling of the
people would not be offended by a relaxation of the law and a
permission for these marriages to be had I"- - " I know of no
objection to it. I never met with a person who had an objec-
tion to it ; I never met with a person out of Parliament who
joined with the law, and took the same view which the Legis-
lature does of these marriages."—Evidence of R. Cobden,
Esq., M.P.

"'ln 1835 a most important statute had been passed by that
House, under somewhat peculiar circumstances, and he might
also say, of haste and want of due deliberation, materially
affecting a portion of the marriage laws of this country. In
OM case th6-ioge-6f-Heaven was silent, and that of man
bad ben given with a hesitation and confusion of utter-
ant deprived it of its due authority."—Speech of Lord
Francis Egerton (now Earl of Ellesmere), in the House of
Commons.

"That our Established Church should select one point of
the Canon law, and establish an arbitrary limit without giv-
ing any power of dispensation, was, he was sorry to say, a
very great tyranny, and one which he felt convinced that the
true principles of the Church of England did not sanction."—
speech of R. Monckton Milnes, Esq., M,P,
It is remarkable that while there is an express injunction
against the marriage of a man with his brother's widow, there
is no such prohibition against his deceased wife's sister. In
verse 18 the prohibition is only against marrying the wife's
sister during the lifetime of the first wife, which of itself im-
plies the liberty to marry the sister after her death."—Rev.
Dr. Chalmers.
" Nothing is more common in almost all the States of Ame-
rica than second marriages of this sort ; and so far from being
doubtful as to their moral tendency .they are among us
deemed the very best sort of marriages. In my whole life I
never heard the slightest suggestion against them, founded
on moral or domestic
,considerations. '—Chief Justice Story,
United States.
"Whence, I pray you, is this rigour of man against man,
h
has not raquired ? Who has given to men this
power ,
annulling or prohibiting marriage)? Be it that
they were holy e
men, and influenced by pious zeal : why should
h
ge my liberty ? Let any one be as zea-
lousl
and as holy as he will, so that he does not injure his
neighbour or rob him of his liberty. Let them arm themselves
witht
let notheniv manine law,
pu and say, What God hath joined to-
gethert asunder.' The union of husband and
wife is of Divine right, which is binding, however contrary it
may be to human laws, and the laws of men ought to yield to
it without reserve. Forif a man leaves father and mother to
cleave to his -wife, how much rather shall he trample under
foot the contemptible and unjust laws of men, and cleave to
his wife ? And Pops, Bishop, or officer, if he dissolve any
marriage contracted in opposition to merely human law, is
Antichrist, a violator of nature, a traitor against the Divine
Majesty ; for that sentence still stands : ' What God hath
joined, let no man put asunder.'---Perish, therefore, those
cursed traditions of men, which have been brought in only to
multiply dangers, offences, and miseries in the Church."—
Luther.
"His first duty was to ascertain whether there was any-
. thing in the Word of God which forbids the marrying of a
widower with a sister of his deceased wife. He looked care-
fully, he endeavoured earnestly to come at the truth, and he
was perfectly convinced that there was nothing in the Scrip-
tures which prohibited that act."—Speech of R. Spooner,
Esq., M.P.
" My opinion of the law has long been that it Is an impolitiO
restriction."—Archdeacon of Derby.
" I believe such marriages as you wish to make lawful are
already lawful, according to the letter and spirit of Holy