The Sun.
London, England, 1857-07-02 00:00:00

FEIST'S RACING RECORD.

The punctuality with which this little work has been
issued is highly creditable to the publisher, Mr. Wright.
The half-yearly part was placed before us yesterday, and
it contains a complete record of every meeting—whether
" legitimate" or otherwise—that has taken f lace this
year in England, Ireland, and Scotland. A work which
contains a complete calendar of flat racing and steeple.
chasing was never before published, and Mr Feist has
supplied a want experienced by every person interested
in turf pursuits. The typographical arrangement is un-
exceptionable, and the copious index affords the means of
a ready reference. It is the most complete racing calen-
dar published, and no sporting man should be without it.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKRIrtook the chair at twelve o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were severally read a third time
and passed-oday and Skipton Road ; Haslingden and
Todmorden Roads ; Kinross-shire Railway ; Leslie Rail-
way; Selby and Market Weiilaton Road.
The following bill were considered and ordered to be
read a third time—Elie Harbour ; Lancaster and Car-
lisle and Ingleton Railway ; Metropolitan' Railway ;
Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland ; Newport,
Abergaveony, and Hereford Railway ; Newry and
Enniskillen Railway ; Thames and Medway Conzer-
vancy ; West London and Crysta Palace Railway.
Fleming's Estate BO! was read a second time.
TIMES ASSURANCE AMALGAMATION BILL,

Mr. C. FORSTER moved bhat, in the ease of the
Times, A thenmum, and Beacon Assurance Coin oanies
Amalgamation Bill, the standing orders Nos. 70 and
199 be suspended, and the ex4rniner of petitions for pPi-
vate bills have leave to sit and proceed forth with upon
the petition for additional Provision.

The motion was agreed to.
NEW GOVERNMENT OFFICES.

Sir B. HALL moved for a copy of a letter, dated
the 30th day of June, 1857, a dressed by the First
Commissioner of Works, &c. to the Lords of her Ma-
jesty's Treasury, containirg the award of the Judges
appointed to report upon the designs for the proposed
new government offices.—Ordered.

THE DIVORCE BILL.

PROTESTS.

Dissentient,—

1. Because the effect of rejecting this amendment
will be to confine the dissolution of marriage upon
the adultery of the husband to the four cases stated
11 in the Bill, which we consider to be not only inex-
pedient, but, as contrasted with the relief upon the
adultery of the wife, partial and unjust.
2. Because, as the clause is framed, although the
husband should be living in the most open and no-
torious adultery, and should even bring his mis-
tress into the family residence, insulting the wife
by ner presence, and should endeavour by ill us ige
to compel her to submit to this disgrace, such a case
would not come within its provisions.
3. Because the adultery of the husband, accom-
panied with the commission of the greatest crimes,
and even the most infamous vices, would not
entitle the wife to relief under this clause,

4. Because the adultery of the husband, although
coupled with his condemnation to penal servitude,
even for life, and the consequent degradation and
misery of the wife, would not, under the provisions
of this Bill, enable her to obtain a dissolution of the

marriage.
5. Because many other cases of similar injustice
and hardship are excluded from relief under this
clause.
6. Because to allow a divorce for the adultery of
the wife, and to refuse it in these and other cases of
adultery by the husband, coupled with acts of deep
injury inflicted upon the wife, is manifestly unjust.
r. Because, although the adultery of the wife
may lead to the imposing a spurious offspring on
the husband, andentitlehim to a divorce for areason
whichwould not apply to the case of adultery by the
husband, other circumstances may, and frequently
do, occur in connection with the adultery of the
husband, giving the wife an equal claim to this
remedy.
8. Because no distinction is made in Scripture
between the case of the man and of the woman in
the commission of adultery. The sin is the same in
both—both are included under the same prohibi-
tion.
9. BeCause the whole tendency and spirit of the
Christian religion is manifestly calculated to raise
women to equal rights and equal responsibilities
with men. "It has "in the words of an eminent
writer on general law (Chief Justice Story) " ele-
vated woman to the rank and character of an equal,
instead of being an humble companion or a devoted
slave of her husband ;" and accordingly we find
that as Christianity ex'ended itself, and its influ-
ence was brought to bear upon social and civil
affairs, so the condition of woman has improved,
and her rights to protection and redress were ac-
knowledged. Will. respect to marriage and divorce
tee rule of the Roman Catholic Church applies to
both sexes equally, while all Protestant Legisla-
tures (except our own), in declaring that marriage
may be dissolved for the cause of adultery, have
accorded to the wife the same rights and remedies
as to the husband.
10. Because by our ecclesiastical law (the only
law at present applicable to this subject), the same
judgment is pronounced in the case of adultery,
whether the crime he committed by the husband or
wife, and there appears to us no reason why, in ex-
tending the remedy, the princ,ple should be
changed.
11. Because as to the objection that fue exten-
sion of the law to cases of adultery by the husband
will give occasion for a great number of suits for
divor,e, we think such apprehension is altogether
groundless. The proceedings cin originate only
with the wife, and she has, both as to feeling and
interest, so much at stake, so much to relinquish
which must be most dear to her, that we think
there is little fear of I er resorting to this remedy,
except in extreme c-ises, and after all hope of
amendment has ceased.
12. Because by the law of Scotland the adultery
f the husband with respect to divorce is placed on
the same tooting with the adultery of thewife. This
law is found to be attended with no inconvenience.
The evidence on the subject is above all exception,
and we deem it most desirable that laws which so
deeply affect the social and moral condi-
tion of the people should, in contiguous parts of the
same empire, be in ace irdance with each other.
HUTCHINSON.
HA R UINGTON.
LYNDH URST.
TALBOT DE MALA.HIDE.
BELMORE.

Dissentient:— 1
1. Because the contract of marriage is the most
solemn engagement into which a man can enter,
and in which he promises to love, comfort, and
honour the woman, and keep her under all circum-
stances of sickness or of health, and adhere to her
as long as they shall both live.
2. Because the purposes of this engagement, as
adduced from Scripture, are of the deepest interest
and importance—viz., for the birth of children to
be brought up in the love and fear of God, for a
remedy against sin, and for mutual society, help,
and comfort, both in prosperity and adversity.
3. Because by wilful desertion not only is this
sacred promise impiously violated, but all the pur-
poses for which this ordinance of God was instituted
are wholly frustrated. Even in the most ordinary
contract the breach of it on the one side puts an end
to the obligation on the other, and we sea no reason
why a different rule should be applied to the con-
tract of marriage, and more especially in a case de-
structive of the entire objects of the union. It ap-
pears to us to be contrary t 3 all principle, and
most unjust, that the husband should be pertnitt-d
to set at naught an engegement followed, as it must
be, by such consequences, and that the woman
should continue to be bound by it.
4. Because we feel strongly the extreme cruelty of
such conduct towards the deserted wife in the utter
dis pponituaent of berconfiden.t. expectations of hap-
piness from the promised love, comfort, and society
of her husband, and leaving her without hope to
the contempla ion of a long, dreary, and desolate
future.