The Sun.
London, England, 1857-05-26 00:00:00

enabling the court to preniounce a dil:orce a virmulo
rnatrivaonii after five y an.," dePention.
Tue LORD CHANCELLOR resisted this as uu

wise.
After some further discussion, the house divided—
Contents 8
Nan-contents
Majority again4t amendment —B9
The Earl of CARNARVON asked whether, after the
dissolution of a marriage nn the ground of incestuous
adultery with a wife's sister, the husband would be at
liberty to marry the si,4,r ?
The LORD CHANCELL'AL apprehended that the
husband cowd not marry.
Upon this the e :use was agreed to.
Lord AIALMESBURY moved a clause to prevent
persons who had been divorced marrying again. He
would disqualify all who had been divorced.
After some conversation and discussion, the clauses
up to 42 were agreed to,

At clause 43,
Tne Bishop of OXFORD took up the question again,
and renewed bis opposition to the principle of the bill.
Tne scriptural argument, be said, bad not been met. He
regarded that bid as an excuse by which bigamists might
escape punishment. If they wera to poll the country,
the homes of England would answer with one voice. The
bishop then called upon them to protect the poor, the
wet-. 11, and the innecimt.

After some csnversation,
Lord DERBY said there were three questions before
the house—one, whether both divorced parties should
starry again ; the second, that neither should marry
again ; the third, proposed by the Archbishop of Can-
terbury, that only the injured party ahould marry again.
If the last could be amended so that only the petitioning
party should marry again he would support it.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY acquiesced.
The house, after further desultory discussion, decided
on this amendment.
For the clause
Against it
Maj nity against the clause —6
The question was then put as to whether the clause
as amended should stand part of the Bill.
The Bishop of OXFORD thought that, though the
bill was improved by the additional words introduced by
the most rev. prelate, yet it still went too far. Re moved
the total omission of the dense.
Lord CAMPBELL moved that the chairman report
progress, and that the house resume.
The LORD CHANCELLOR hoped that this would
settle the question at once.
Lord LYNDHURST rose to move an amendment to
the clause; but he was reminded that it was not then the
time.
Earl GREY thought it was not consistent with their
dignity to proceed any further to-night, and should sup-
port the motion for adjournment.
Eail GRANVILLE said that after the noble lord
(Lord Lyndhurst) bad borne the fatigue of sitting there
so long to state his views, the house ought to have the
patience to hear him.
Lord LYNDHURSTproposed to amend the clause by
strikieg out all that related to criminal conversation.
The bid provided that no action shoula be sustained for
criminal conversation tiil after a divorce. The effect of
this would be that all those who from religious scruples
refused to sue for a divorce would be precluded from an
action for criminal conversation. This was the case with
Roman Catholics and other religionists. Again, he would
have the action for damages made as cheap as possible,
but by the clause no man could bring an action without
the previous expene of a divorce. In fact, he objected
to the clause altogether. His noble and learned friend
Lord St. Leonards), who was not the mover, proposed
amendments which he had not moved. He (Lord Lynd-
hurst) could not take up those amendments. All he could
I do would be to move the omission of the words relating
to actions for crierenal conversations.
Lord WENSLEYDALE said this was a most impor-
tant quesion, on which he had much to say. He should
support the motion that the house do now resume.
The LORD CEIA.NCELLOR said that they would
look as if they were not ready to go on with their work
at so very late an hour.
The Marqu:s 01C L A.NRICARDE said that the house
ought nut to resume till the noble and learned lord's
(Lord Lyndhurst) statement had been answered. He had
raised a very grave question, and the house ought not to
resume without some answer. The great objection to
these actions for damages had hitherto been the form
in which these actions had been brought. It was a sub-
ct which demanded much consideration, as to whether
they should abolish a pecuniary remedy for what was
very often a pecuniary damage. He wanted to know
the view of the Government on this subject.
Lord CAMPELL again urged the adjournment of the
house. Even in the Mouse of Commons it was not the
custom to sit so many hours in committee even upon im-
portant subjects.
The adjournment was, after some slight further hesita-
tion, then agreed to, at one o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-(YESTERDAY.)

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 4 o'clock.
The Princes of Oude, accompanied by the Nawab of
Surat, occupied seats in the Speaker's gallery. The
gorgeousness of their Eastern costume, and their swarthy
countenances, were the objects of universal attraction.