The Sun.
London, England, 1857-08-22 00:00:00

BILL.

On the motion for the third reading of this bill,
Mr. HENLEY proceeded to review the dis-

cussion that had taken place on the bill, and the changes
that bad been made in it in many of its material parts.
When the bill was introduced, the Government said it
was a perfect measure, and that any oce attentively
reading it could not fail to understand the opinion of the
Government on it, and in consequence the Opposition
had had, both in the house and out of it, " the dogs of
war" let slip on them for opposing the measure
and attempting to discuss it. Oa the introduction of the
measure, the Opposition stated that there was
no time to ful:y consider the subject, and he
thought he should be able to show, from the result,
how correct was their prophecy. It was said when the
bill was introduced that it made no change in the law,
but merely altered the proceedings relative to divorce,
and got rid of a greal b:ot on the institutions of the
country and- the scandal attaching to actions of crint.
son. ; and it was further alleged that the bill would bring
home to the doors of all classes of her Majesty's subjects
those privileges in reference to divorce which were only
now within the reach of the rich. It was quite irnpos-
...

sible at the period of the session when the measure was
introduced to give it that consideration which its Ira-
portuee demanded, and he thought he should be able to
show that the objects for which it had been introduced
were notrlikoly to boattained, and that the measure stood
in such a position as showed it had not received that
consideration that was either creditable to the Govern•
ment or the importance of the bill demanded. The hon.
gentleman then referred to the period that had been
occupied in discussing it. Seven days—morning and
evening sittings—had been occupied in committees, and
the result had been 13' material changes in the IA),
although they had been told it was a perfect measure,
and had received ample discussion by competent persons
in the other house. Of these 13 changes no loss than
10 of them were made without divisions ,ard. as

sented to by the Government on the reasons and obser-
vation advanced by hon. members on both sides of the
House ; two material alterations had been male by the
Attorney-General, and one on a division by the opp.-
nents of the measure. Fifteen divisions had taken place
in the Committee. Of tbe;e 7 were proposed by gentle
men who voted for the second rea,fing. The hill a,
amended had made a material change in the status of a
woman separated from her husband judicially or di-
vorced, and enlarged the grounds relative to the charge
and custody of children. The most material change
made in the bill was in reference to the constitution
of the new tribunal and local jerisc;iction ; security to a
wife after separation ; the grounds on which divorce was
to be obtained ; increased discretion to the court to .die-
miss suits ; fine on the committal of adaltery ; procedure
in the new court, and the right of appeal. The right
hon. gentleman then entered into other details of
change 4, and concluded by expressing an opinkn Viet
this important question had not been snffi:iently con-
sidered, and regretted that GovernMent should have
considered it necessary to pros] the measure through
this session.

Sir G. GREY congratulated the house on the pro-
spect of the bill being real a third time without a
division, from the right hon. gentlema❑ hating con•
exuded his review of the measure without a motion.
He said that he considered the statements of the
right hon. gentleman ehowel that the bill had beee
maturely considered, and was a sufficient answer to the
charge of undue hasts made against the Govern-
ment. He defended the bill, and urged that the changes
that had been made in the bill were by no men- s
of that importance with reference to its principle
attached to them by the right hon. gentleman, though
he (Sir Geo. Grey) admitted they were great improve-
ments. (Hear, hear )
Sir W. HEA.THCOTE said the Opposition were by
no means satisfied with the state of the and their
declining then to go to a division which would not test
the real opinion of the house was not to be taken as
con-
se►.ting on their part to the bill passing.
Mr. AYRTON thought the house had done its duty
in making the bill as perfect as possihle.
After some remarks from Mr. NEWDEGATE,
Lord J. MANNERS entered his protest against the
third reading of the bill. He objected to it principally
because it imported for the first time into the statute
law of England the dissolubility of marriage by human
law. He entered at some length into other objsotioni
he had to the details of the bill, and said that it was to
be regretted that a bill of so much importance had been
forced EO late in the session through a jaded House of
Commons. The manner in which it had been forced

through that house was a source of great regret and ob-
jection to hiso, and never during the whole of his
Parliamentary career had he heard such complaints
against the conduct of business in that house as had been
made by persons of weight and influence against the pro-
ceedings of the noble lord in reference to this bill. -
Lord PALMERSTON said that the intention of the
hon. gentlemen opposite not to divide the house was
consistent with their conduct throughout the discussion
on the bill.' He denied that any member of the Govern-
had enunciated an opinion or anything that could
approach to it that the bill shoUld bu hurriedly passed
through the bean as it came down from the other
home. The government had alaVays shown not only
their readiness but their desire that the hilt should be
fully and properly discussed. It bad been said that the
bill should not be passed both privately and' publicly.
On one occasion an hon. member said to him, "You
shan't pass the bill," and he replied to him, " Won't
we."! (Laugater.) On another occasion the hon. member
for the University of Oxford spoke of the Greek Kaends,
which he subsequently explained as not used in reference
to delaying the bill, but the Government thought so,
and it was in consequence of those threats that he (Lord
Palmerston) said ell a former occasion the G ,vernment
would sit till September to pass the bill. The noble lord
then referred to other matters connected with the pro-
gress of the bill, and also its details, and said that he
denied that marriage was considered indissoluile by t'ie
Church of England, and referred to the 25th Article of
Religion in confirmation of his statement. With reference
to the concession made to the clergy in the blil, his
lordship expressed a hope that they would understand
the feeling that induced Government to agree to it,
and that they would not look upon it as a principle
which if carried out would be detrimental to the interests
of the Church of England. He considered the bill bad
been improved by the amendments that had been intro-
duced into it ; and in reference to the charge that the
bill bad not been introduced to allow the house to be•
come acquainted and understand its provisions and give
their attention to it, he said that when it first came to
that house there were 347 members on the first division,
and that further progress showed that the supporters of
the bill von) as two to one. In conclusion, the noble