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

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDN ESDAY EVENING, JUL Y 27, 1859.

•
rrl-IE KEAN TESTlMONlAL.—Subscriptions
for the TESTIMONIAL to be presented to CHARLES
BEAN, ESQ., F.S.A., will be received by the following
Bankers :
Messrs. Coutts and Co., Strand, London.
The Union Bank, Pall Mail
And Messrs. Robarts, Curtis, and Co.
Also at Sams', 1, St. James-street ; Mitchell's, 33, Old Bond-
street ; and T. Chappell's, New Bond-street.

GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.
CHEAP EXCURSION to BATH and BRISTOL.—On
Saturday, July 30th, a Train will leave the Padding-ton Sta-
tion at 6 40 p.m., returning on Monday, August Ist, from
Bristol at 5 30 p.m., and Bath at 6 p.m. Fares there and
back : Bristol, 14s. and 7s ; Bath, 12s and Gs. '

(BEAT WESTERN RAILWAY.
CHEAP EXCURSION to OXFORD, HUNGER-
FORD, &c. —On Sunday, July 31, a Train will leave Pad-
dington at 745 a.m., for Reading, Theale, Aldermaston,
Woolhampton, Thatcham, Newbury, Kintbury, and Hunger-
ford (Fares, ss. 6d., 45., and 35.) ; Pangbourne, Goring, Wal-
lingford-road, Didcot, Culham. Abingdon, and Oxford (Fares,
6s. 6d., 55., and 45.), returning' the same evening from Oxford
at 7 o'clock, and intermediate Stations as per handbills.

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 Shareholders at the Annual General Meeting,
held on the 30th June, 18.59.
Rear-Admiral the Rt. Hon. Lord GEORGE PAULET, C. 8.,
in the Chair.
LIFE DEPARTMENT.
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.
G UARANT EE 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.
GENERAL BALANCE-SHEET ON 31ST DECEMBER, 1858.
LIABILITIES.
To liabilities under policies according to Professor De Mor-
under;-namely -
Present value of £2,358,912 on single lives with
profits
Present value of 413,919 on single lives with-

179,616 0 0

out profits....
Present value of 86,998 endowment assur-
anze with profits
Present value of
antes without
•
profits 13,832 0 0
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
as •urances
To amount reserved

42,102 0 0

32,759 endowment assur-

' 67,487 0 0

26,592 0 0
for annuities .. 54,833 0 0

£1,331,76 t 0 0
. 78,605 0 0
31,518 5 7
14,587 8 6
4,802 16 0

£3,204,819
To proprietors for paid-up capital
To depositors and other accounts
To reversionary department
To suspense account
* 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-
stalinents, commencing 'Jan-
uary, 1860
To other liabilities on account
of the said association 44,359 3 4

To balance in favour of the company carried
down

167,696 7 0

192,925 2 11

£1,821,809 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
Present value of 3,975 0 4 per annum on
endowment as- surauces, with-
profits
Present value of 1,560 19 4 per annum on
endowment as- surances, with-
out oofits
Present value of 6,300 7 6 per annum on
joint lives, with profits....
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

183,193 0 0

45,022 0 0

12,675 0 0

80,591 0 0

£107,351 11 5 £1,435,902 0 0
;yr investments, as under, viz. :
On mortgages £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
187,079 15 9

By assets transferred from the Bank of Lon-
don and National Provincial Insurance As-
surance Association, viz.:—
Mortgages £34,293 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

£1,821,899 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.
Sin,—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., Hon. See.
21, Parliament-street, June 20, 1819.

FACTS and OPINIONS TENDING to PROVE the NE-
CESSITY of LEGALISING 3IARRIAGE 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 ofjudgment
from him ; neither shall any maxi take mine from me."—
Chillingworth.
" Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny. In such a coun-
try as this, they are of all bad things the worst—worse by
tar than anywhere else ; and they derive a peculiar malignity
from the wisdom and soundness of the rest of our institu-
tions."—Burke.

a state of things which ought to ekist ; • and not being of
opinion that there is any moral objectionN 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 votefor the molion."—Speech of
Lord Palmerston.
"I must say that I haVe satisfied myself that there is not
any religious prohibition of these marriag-es." "Itis a mis-
fortune that the feeling of relationship which. takes place by
marriage should be weakened by any alteriation 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 remedy' n ... 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'feelthat they can without scrnplezontract 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 ft matt from.marriage with a deed:aged Wife's sistef."—
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-L.-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 sisterb, 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. I 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 aray 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 the opinions expressed
Iv those who contended that there existed any Divine pro-
hibition."—Bishop of Fit, David's Speech, 1851.
" The_ Scriptures should be the qnle of life as well as of
faith, and, as I can find nothing that militates against such
marriages, I feel bound to oppose Iproposition that Inter-
feres with the liberty of the -subje ."—Rev. Sir Erasmus
Williams, Bart., M.A.; Chancellor of 't. 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. 187 seems not to contain a prohibition
of it (viz., marriage with a deceased wife's sister). Such re-
strictions as pride, covetousness, or human policyhave 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
importanee 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 antewer—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-
conveniencethat 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 not the least un-
certainty), such marriage is plainly. allowed. "—Rev. Alexander
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. Garbett.
"People in general do not consider such marriaays 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
I be elected one of the proctors I shall move for an alteration
in this regard in the table of kindred and affinity. 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 dig- he 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,fhaving no such sanction, is
observed only by the scrupulous, evaded bf the wealthy, and
defied or disregarded by the poor."—Rev. Canon Dale.
" It is not only not considered as prohibited, put 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 Rabbi of 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 asked 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. J. C. Miller, D.D.
"Within the meaning of Leviticus, and the constant prac-
tice of the commonwealth by tho Jews a man was prohibited
to marry his wife's sister only during her life; after he
might—so the text is. This perhaps is a knot not easily un-
tied, how the Levitical degrees are God's law in this king-
dom, but not as they were in the commonwealth of Israel,.
when first given."—Chief Justice Vaughan.
"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 broad general principle, that every restriction is
an evil in itself—the burden of proof lying upon the advocates
"You
of any restriction to show its necessity." • • • •
are at liberty to refer to me as approving of the abolition of
the restriction on marriage to which You allude."—Arclibp.
Whately, in a letter to G. A. Crowder, Esq.
"I speak advisedly when I say that I come here prepared to
offer my opinion, that, theologically, it is correct that such
marriages shou:d take place ; I see no ground what3oever on
account of which such marriages may not be legalised.
Evidence of Rev. J. Hatchard.
"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."-3lontesquieu.
den
Ii
ea d
vi
ttihmaits
—mita ii•rsihaegpe
ewfitLhi
ea
eewlinfej'vssister
"Has never had occasion to observe, either in tue 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
r iiayi)s not
Le.
never believed it. The great inducement to these marriages
is, that these parties have a better opportunity than is gene-
rally afforded of being acquainted with each other's real cha-
raster and disposition."—Evidence of the Rev. J. F. Denham,
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 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.
In 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, mated-alb'
affecting a portion of the marriage laws of this country. In
this case the voice of Heaven was silent, and that of man
had been given with a hesitation and confusion of utter-
ance that 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 didnot sanction."—
Speech of It. Monckton Milnes, Esq., M.P.
"It is remarkable that while there is an express injunction
against the marriage of a man with hisbrother'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."—itev.
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
nenr heard the slightest suggestion against them, founded
on moral or domestic considerations."—Chief Justice Story,
United Stator,
"Whence, I pray iron, is this rigotif tit Man against man,
which God has no ratluired 9 Who has given to men this
power (of ittitiallirig dfi ptohibliting marriage)l lie it that
they were holy Men, and influenced by pions zeal : why should
another's seal infringe my liberty ? Let any one be as zea-
lous and as holy Fig he *it „.60 Mai he does not injure his
neighbour or rob him of his aty., ;et them arm themselves
with the DiVine law, and sa,y, What tiOd bath joined to-
g-ether let not Man, Alit asunder.' The union of husband and
wife is of toivine right, Whibli is binding, however contrary it
Esq.,wtua, ses
y3lvi o.
ma), be to human laws; and the law., of men ought to yield to
it witlicia rcserise. , Forif a man leaves father' and mother to
cleave to his Wife, lioif rriui`h rather shall he trample under
feet the Contemptible and unjust laws of men, and cleave td
his Niche 1 And Pope, Bishop, or ofiker, it he dissolve any
marriage coriteetdd in opposition to merely human law, is
Antichrist, a violator of nature, traitor against the Divine
' Majesty ; for that sentence still stands ' What God bath
joined,u"Hiee
t 1
fire
atr
first
tintc
de
unmtsyaeri:
was
put
itt
lah,lcsaaittsiintel
ascertaint(o hrrg. a' asunder.'—Perish,
been
ere
tneitinso: 1
aticb,tir:therefore,
ebi
arntne rtwineae psnstioihanyrrfi
.ottsyi
impolitic
multiply dangers, offeneeS, and miseries in the Church."—
ther.
e
n
is
tiLthiuli thely, he ei
id eWord
outhneoede
efl
eadGawtrond e
toh forbidscorae a thet iaw, tic
prohibitedre-
that aet " S h
widower with a sister of his deceased wife. He- I`,.'°l-` cla
peec of R. Spooner,
restriction."—Archdeacon of Derby.
perfectlyhppiienhiioueoon:'
"I believe such marriages as you wish to make lawful are
already lawful, according to the letter and spirit of holy

' Scripture, and r hope the civil and ecclesiastical law will
speedily be made conformable to the Divine."—Dr. Close,,
Dean of Carlisle.
" Moses does net prohibit marriage- with the sister of a
deceased wile."—Rosenmuller. "
In her lifetime,' because when she was dead he might
marry her sister."—Menochius.
" 'ln her lifetime.'. This sufileiently indicates that he per-
mitted it when the wife was dead, Otherwise than in the case
of two brothers."Jansenius.
"Thou shalt riot marry two sisters at the same lime, as'
Jacob did Rachel and Leah, but there is nothing in this law
that rendered it illegal to marry a sister-in-law when her
sister Was dead."—Dr.Addm Clarke.
" The, meaning therefore is this :--Thou shalt not take a
woman as a wife at the same time with her sister ; for when
.the wife was dead it was allowed to marry her sister."—
Fagius.
" Certainly, after the death of the wife, it was permitted to
the husband to marry her sister, because she (the sister) is
not among the other enumerated kindred of the wife."—
Rabbi Levi.
"Both sides.use various arguments to show what degrees
are prohibited front analogy with those forbidden in the law.
But unless it be a manifest thing, and the inference altogether
Undeniable, it is something presutnptuous, from mere analogy,'
to add to the Divine law."—Joannes Clericus.
"Thee three grounds upon which the petition proceeded
• wire in perfect accordance with his • own convictions, as he
*fully believed they were also with the mind of England and
the general sentiment of society, upon the subject to which
the petition referred. The three points upon which`the peti-
tion was especially groundkd were these—first, that such mar-
ineasi&anond
otohnastdosruactiho-
riage was not forbidden by the Word of God ; second, that
Mosaic moral
Rw betweenhee"You
ljoyu.noßarnt
ilocelobehujwrenpioedsant
Christian
marriage was
aosf
i'there was no consanguinity _or blood relationship existing
understood oopo oßtboae
bvs tiay dispensation,ut
entrusted
n,
ct h.r thereau
Jenkins.
eynokduii
tp.sare o
nothing
no g
.p i
repugnantni o n that,
ansm.
f
. - , •
•
a
so far as the interpretation' of Scripture goes, either in the
otopltnrhtohosnee.p,m,e—opinion."
—Evidence
There is nothing repugnant in my
*me in consequence
of my having declared without hesitation that the marriage
of a sister of a deceased wife was not prohibited by the Levi-
tical Law."—The late Bishop of Llandaff.
"I shall only add, that all persons who voted for the Act of
Parliament which legalised such marriages of that descrip-
tion as had taken place, nay, all who had an opportunity of
opposing that Act, and did not oppose it, must be regarded as
suoscribing to the declaration that those marriages were not
in opposition to the Word of God."—The late Bishop of
Meath.
"Without pursuing the subject further, I shall give it as
my opinion that the marriage in question is not against either
nature or the law of God."—Rev. T. Binney.
" Mropinion is- certainly in.-favor:4%ol.lth, relax ation.ne
law prohibiting the marriage of a widower to his late wife's
sister."—The Chancellor of the Diocese of Exeter.
" Seeing that it was not against the, law of God—seeing the
great social evils which arose from the restriction, and be-
lieving that there was no comparison between the social ad-
vantages and the social disadvantages arising from this cause,
he should give the measure his cheerful assent."—Speech of
the Duke of Norfolk.
"The ancient Roman law permitted the marriage of two
sisters in succession.".—Heineccius.
"Are marriages of this description considered in Germany
to be at all contra bonos mores ?" " Not at all. So far from
their being considered contra bonos mores, the feeling of the
people of Germany is undoubtedly in favour of such mar-
riages." ...." It frequently happens that a widower marries
his decased wife's sister out of a pious and affectionate feel-
ing for his departed wife. And the feelings of the women of
Germany are so strong in favour of such marriages, that it often
occurs that the last parting request by a wife on her death-
bed to her husband ia, to marry her sister in case he should
feel inclined to marry again. This arises partly from affec-
Hon for her surviving husband or relations, that he may not
become estranged from her conaexions, and partly from affec-
tion to her sister, and very frequently, where there are young
children, for their sake." ...." Are you aware of any evil con-
sequences from the celebration of marriages of this descrip-
tion ?"—" None. whatever. I have spoken with several of my
friends, and I have written to some others, asking them
whether they are aware that this power of dispensation is the
cause of immorality in families, and their answer is, none
whatever.any I am not at all aware of any."—Evidence of A.
Bach, Esq.
",Though a man mi ht not marry two sisters together, it
seems a natural conclusion, from the phrase in her lifetime,'
that he might marry the sister of his deceased wife—and thus
we learn from Selden, the Jews in general understood it"—
Dr. Dodd.
"The very strongest reasons for engaging in a second mar-
riage contract is, frequently, to provide a suitable female head
for a Camily of shall children. In such cases, who is so likely to
exercise the requisite maternal care and affection as the sister
of the deceased mother? To prohibit a marriage under such
circumstances seems to me inhuman."—Hon. Judge Mason,
United States.
"If the founders of our Church have incautiously adopted
a canon prohibiting that which of its own mere authority it
had no right to prohibit, and which Scripture does not war-
rant it in prohibiting, now that the evil has become apparent,
it is surely time for that Church to rescind such canon, and to
cease opposition to the repeal of any secular law founded upon
it."—Speech of Viscount Gage.
" Having to deal with persons of other communions, who
did not recognize the same ecclesiastical law, with the Roman
Catholics, who by dispensation toler,4te such marriages—there
being also Protestant churches in Europe, and Protestant
denominations in this country, who recognized the validity,
ecclesiastically speaking, of such marriages. . . . It was
impossible not to feel that the civil law which declared the
illegality of such marriages, and bastardized the children, im-
posed a heavy penalty on persons who, by contracting these
marriages, did not contravene the tenets of their religions
persuasion." . . " Socially speaking,., if a case was made
out that morality would be endangered by the Bill, that
would be a reason for rejecting it; but he had not heard it
establithed that such danger could arise. Marriage beteg a
civil rite, they were bound to make that ivit rite co-extensive .
with the feelings of the country. He had, therefore, come to
the conclusion that it was his duty to support the second read-
ing of the Bill."—Speech of Right Hon. Sidney Herbert, M.P.
" Doubtless it was very gratifying to our national pride to
be told that a higher standard of morals prevailed in this
country than could be found elsewhere ; but surely. it could
not be denied that the rules of chastity were as strictly ob-
served in the North of Germany, Switzerland, and the United
States of America, as they were in England. He was entitled
to say that the evils anticipated from permitting, these mar-
riages here had not manifested themselves in those countries,
for, if they had, the law which authorised them would not
have been suffered to continue for 12 mouths."—Speech of
Lord Chief Justice Cockburn.
" He had before stated his belief, that if the matter came
to be investigated before the Courts, it would turn out that
the marriage contemplated in this Bill was in Scotland a
lawful marriage ; and he bad good reason for saying that that
was the opinion of an hon. Baronet, than whom no person
ever stood higher in the Church of Scotland—Sir H. Mon-
erica'. For himself, having conic to the deliberate opinion
that the marriage in question was not forbidden by the law
of Leviticus, he came also to the opinion that the connection
was not a e
crime,
ech o and f
the Lord Advocate of Scotland (Ruther
that the marriage was effectual for l
purposes. "—Sp
ford).
" I have known probably several scores of such marriages.
S
I have counted a dozen within the last three or four minutes.
Mpst of these dozen belong to the highest class of society. :
One of them is a doctor of divinity. Several of them are
ministers of the Gospel. One is a member of Congre Am-
brose Spencer, the eminent Chief Justice of this State, died a
few years ago. He married two sisters of Dewitt Clinton, the
distinguished Governor of this State. The Presbyterian
Church of this village has probably not more than 50 members.
Two of these married sisters of their wives."—Gerrit Smith,
Esq., United States.
"I express my conviction that Scripture says not one word
against marriage with a deceased wife's sister. Surely it is
not a crime, and, if it be not, the law that constitutes so must
be, for the worst of all crimes is an evil and unjust law."—
Rev. Geo. Gilfillan, Dundee.
" The prohibition of such marriages is, in my judgment,
sanctioned neither by Scripture, nor by physiology, nor by
expediency."—Rev. H. Renton, Kelso, Scotland.
" He declared, most conscientiously, he could find no prohi-
bition of this marriage in the Holy Scriptures."—Speech of
the Right Hon. Stuart Wortley, M.P., Recorder of London.
" If this marriage be lawful in the sight of God, then I ,go
upon the broad ground that, in such a case, no man has a right
to impose a restriction on his fellow-man which God has not
imposed ; that the doing so can only bring a snare upon the
conscience, and be the occasion of sin ; and that no sanction
of human law can be expected ultimately to succeed in enforc-
ing what a man feels is no transgression of the law of God."
. . . . " That it is lawful, according to the Word of God,
I consider incontrovertibly proved by the passage in Levi-
ticus, of which I feel sure I have established the only correct
translation."—Rev. C. J. Goodhart, M.A.
" After all the consideration he had been able to give the
question, his conclusion was, that in no sense could the mar-
riages proposed to be sanctioned by this bill be said to be op-
posed by Scripture."—Speech of T. E. Headlam, Esq., M.P.
"The petition from the city of London, in favour of this
marriage, was signed by a large number of persons, and among
others by the Lord Mayor, the Governor and Deputy-Gover-
nor of the Bank of England, and a considerable number of the
Directors of that establishment, by 50 private bankers, by the
Chamberlain of the city of London, by 237 merchants, 146
solicitors, 124 barristers, and 61 physicians. It was his good
fortune to be acquainted with a large number of the persons
who signed this petition, and he could say from his knowledge
of their characters, that their opinions were entitled to the
greatest weight and attention."—Speech of Lord Overstone.
"That the enactments of the Levitical law are entirely mis-
interpreted when applied in condemnation of marriage with
a deceased's wife's sister was the decided judgment of Mr.
Wesley, the founder of our Societies ; and I believe that
similar views have since been entertained by many of those
among us who have been led by circumstances carefully to
examine the matter, and whose competency to judge of such a
question has given great weight to their conclusion."—Rev.
Dr. Bunting,
" He had given his best attention to the arguments adduced
to show that there was a divine prohibition against these
marriages, but he was satisfied in his own mind that no such
prohibition existed. . . . Then came the question as to
the effects of this measure upon society, and he thought that
the great preponderance cf arguments, and facts upon which
arguments were grounded, were in favour of the alteration of
this law."—Speech of Sir Ge Grey.
" He was sineerely favourable to the object of the Marriages
Bill."—Speech of the Earl of Ellenborough.
" I shall endeavour to show that the marriages it is sought
to legalize are not forbidden by the Word of God ; that they
are not contrary to the law of nature ; and that they are not
inconsistent with the interests of society. I am happy to be
able to inform the house that Lord Denman is desirous of
supporting this Bill."—Speech of Earl St. Germans.
" I believe all restrictions upon the nuptial union, unless
founded upon the law of nature, or the p
express authority of
Scripture, unwise and unjust ; in neither of which sourcth the sister of a
es
have I found this interdict of Marriage wi
deceased wife."—John Quincy Adams, late President of the
United States.
the objection at utterly an_
20 years, has satisfied me that
Vce Story, Massa husetts.
scriptural and unfounded."--Jus
tib
eve one syllable of the
• "As far as I can judge, Ido no e
"Everything that I have read upon this subjec for the last
tion." Chancellor Kent, New Yo k
" There is no law for bidding such r marriages in the state of
being equal, they are re-
Massachusetts ; and, other things a f
have never hear o any sa vantages
unlawfulness of this marriage under the Christian dispense-
garded with favour. I
h sions which, as I perceive from
mark in reference to aPP
re
eau in England."—Hon. Edward
the public discussions, pr
Ambassador to Great Britain.
Everett, late American .
attending, or supposed to attend them ; and I make this re-
but, on the contrary, are be.
They inspire no repvugnn finance,
ea us where there are childer con-
They inspire
extremely ad 9. r,
baes.
,te,—pmHoisthEexrc,
ewnheonelys at
the
o entire
Brazilianstranger
A
i;nfoßrratztlilso,
aalrwe
aayssftroeqbueepnrteassumthedy
th en
of
at the
th.e' hild fh b e
s the c ren o er rother-in-law,
aunt, who already know
f relationshi 'll
and is connected by the ties o p, wi prove a better
perused, with much pleasure, your letters on the
Sf
ourcmh
emr rr ia
rar
segs
e,
m-
to t etti
bassador,
an with the sister of a deceased wife which
marriage or a e in the opinion which I had 1
not only confirm m ong enter-
thi ks satisf
vaned, but must, me n , y every candid mind, that
there is not even a pretence for the assertion that such a con-
nexion is prohibited by the law of God."—Judge Livingston,
motherb to
nth;orasstihbalyn
United States.
" There was no prohibition of the wife's sister. except
" I have
during the lifetime of the wife."—Rev. Professor Robinson,
New York, Author of " Researches in Palestine," &c.
" From the fact that the prohibition of marriage with the
sister of a wife is restricted to the lifetime of the wife, it is
evident that under this prohibition is notcomprehendedma
riage with the sister of a deceased wife, the limitation, • in
her lifetime,' leaving the marriage free after her death."—
Cardinal Cajetan.
" Moses, in Leviticus, prohibited certain marriages and per-
mitted othersin the same degree. For he prohibited marriage
with the wife of a brother even after his death, and did not
prohibit marriage with the sister of a wife, unless in her life-
time ; and, consequently did not prohibit it with a sister of a
deceased wife."—Cardinal Bellarmme.
" Do you construe that passage in Leviticus (xviii., 18) as
or merely
-srohibiting marriage with a deceased wife's sister,
t ether, at
'no. that a man should not take two wlyeti.
1 that verse
being so related ?"—" Certain y,
sisters should
'etter meaning, that two
th
-"me house as wives o e same
- held DY' your Church as

is say
the same tn..,
appears to have the
not be hying together in the
person." . . . "Is suoh a marriag,--