The Sun.
London, England, 1859-02-16 00:00:00

HER MAJESTY'S SHIP ORION.

Admiralty, 16th Feb., 1856.
We are authorised to state that a letter was yes-
terday received from Admiral Fremantle, com-
manding the Channel Squadron, in which he men-
tions that H.M. ship Orion had parted company
from him, but that he was under no apprehension
as to her safety.
No further intelligence of any kind has been
received.

INIPERIAL PAIILIAINIENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(TiIts DAY).
The SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS. •
The following bills were read a second time, and ordered
to be committed : ..
Berks and Hants Extension Railway, Mid-Kent Rail-
way, Witney Railway (No. 2), Malden :and Sheen Valley
Drainage, Wells and Fakenham Railway.
Mr. C. FORSTER moved the following, which were
agreed to :—That the order for the second reading of the
Atlantic Telegraph Company Bill be read, and discharged.
That the bill be withdrawn. That leave be given to bring
in a bill to " alter and amend the Acts relating to the
Atlantic Telegraph Company, and to enable the company
to raise additional capital; and for other purposes." That
Mr. Stuart Wortley and Mr. Samuel Gurney do prepare
and bring in the bill.
PETITIONS.

Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from the inhabi-
tants of Brompton, setting forth that they viewed with
great apprehension the spread of popery in England, and
the dissemmination of the " Garden of the Soul " in the
army.
Mr. DENISON presented la petition praying for the
repeal of the duty on paper.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS presented five petitions to the same
effect.

v vv
TRAMWAYS (IRELAND) BILL.
Sir R. FERGUSON moved the second reading of this
bill, and said he proposed that it should be referred to a

select committee. -
After a few words from Sir D. Norres, Col. French, Mr.
Mr. M'Mahon, and other hon. members,
This bill was read a second time, and ordered to be corn-
mitted this day four weeks. -
MARRIAGE LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
Lord BURY, in moving the second reading of this bill,
said that though he was prepared to answer any objection
on the part of the hon. member (Mr. B. Hopes who had
an amendment on the paper, he believed he would be
consulting the feelings of the house if he abstained from
any observations at present. He would, therefore, merely
at the present moment move that the bill should be read

second time.
Mr. A. B. HOPE said he had to complain of the per-
tinacity with which the noble lord had pressed forward this
measure. The noble lord had given no reasons for his sup-
port of the bill, and merely acted on the principle, sic vote
sic jubio. It was most improper that a measure
like the present, which so seriously affected the social con-
dition of the community, should be only placed in their
hands that morning, and therefore they were called on to
decide on its principle with undue haste. He denied that
there had been an adequate demonstration on the part of
the people in any part of this country, as shown by peti -
Lions, to justify the introduction of this bill. He contended
that the preponderance of feeling in the country was against
the bill. (No, no.) As long as gentlemen Cried " No, no,"
he would cry " Yes, yes." (Laughter.) He repeated that
if the community were fully canvassed, his assertion
would be found to be correct, and he must strongly
denounce the attempt made by the supporters of this
bill to bring the brand of discord into the heart of the social
circle, to change the sacred and tender feelings of the sister
towardsC her brother-in-law, and to make her shrink from
the most innocent attentions on his part. Its effect, also,
on the interests of her nephews and nieces would be most
injurious, and they could no longer look forward with
sincerity to her protection and fection as to that of a
second mother. If they admitted that it should be legal
for a man to marry his sister-in-law, they would inevitably
come to the rendering legal marriage with a niece, which
was the case in those countries on the continent when the
former was sanctioned by law. (" No, no.") He did not
propose to deal with the religious part of the question, be-
cause the arguments which he had brought forward last
year had not been answered ; and he heard one gentleman
state that a charity girl would confute a bench of bishops on
the religious part of the subject. He concluded by moving
that the bill be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. BALL, in supporting the second reading of the bill,
said he had heard nothing from the hon. member (Mr.
Hope) to induce hint to change his opinion on this question,
and he could not see how what was considered to be cor-
rect in 1835, should not be regarded as just and proper in
1859. (Hear, hear.) He had not so much acquaintance
with religious societies as the hon. member, but ho was
connected with several of them, and they were in favour of
the measure. Moreover, they had the fact that the
enreof the
were
petitions presented from no less than 750 clergym
metropolis, who, he believed, formed the majority of the
clergy in London. So far from being productive of the
evils predicted by the honourable member for Maidstone,
they would have directly the contrary effect.
Sir F. BUXTON expressed his surprise that thestrong
member should have asserted that `hen
een they witscann iilered the
o t
popular feeling in the country, w
petitions presented on the subject, and the opinion of the
majority of the press throughout the country, w
strongly advocated the legalising of theose m d
to the Word of
tion. If these marriages were not
ed by the law of man?
e
God, why should they not be galiB :
In fact, it was most desirable ithattheyshould decide on
this question without further delay, and by that means
terminate the suspense whic at presentrevailed in the
minds of the conununity, so long as the was unde-
led. It had been contended that these marriages were
opposed to the book of Leviticus ; but was it not a fact that
the Jews, who were the best interpreters of-the text of the Old
Testament permitted these marriages from the very com-
mencement. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. 11. DRUMMOND said it was a strong proof of the
progress of liberty that within the space of one week a bill
was introduced to sanction incest and another to sanction
sacrilege. (Laughter.) He deniedthat it had been proved
to the satisfaction of any reasoning mindthat the marriages
proposed by this bill were not directly opposed to the Word
of God. (Cries of " Oh, oh.") When the papers sane
tioned incest they did so for some interested motive, but
they had no such plea for the act they proposed to commit.
It was against the law of God to form these marriages,
and the word of man could not set aside that of God.
Mr. AKROYD supported the second reading of the
bill. He said these marriages were very common amongst
the working classes, who, satisfied that they were not for-
bidden by the law of God, had no scruple in contracting
them, and were therefore, so long as the present law was
unaltered, living in a state of what some might call con-
cubinage.
General THOMPSON said that as all his constituents
wanted to marry the sisters of their deceased wives—
(laughter)--he must say a few words in favour of the bill
on their behalf. It was a fact that the community were in
favour of it, and he could not understand how a man who
saw his sister-in-law paying attention to her nephews and
nieces, and supplying the place of their mother could pre-
vent entertaining for her those fi clings which would induce
him to make her his wife. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. STEWART opposed the bill, and condemned legis-
lating for this country without including Scotland.
Sir G. LEWIS supported the second reading
When they looked to Protestant and Cat ofoothune
Alley found that these marriages werelopreri
age with a de-
form or another. This law agains•tto itted in some
the
ceased wife's sister was oppo d feeiflinigtsv6o,ofs jto
people "at large. lie 2el sethe manias
retain the present state of the law, wdhendidsuncoht
existwas
the case ? The present law, rdepideatneot,
exist in this
in other countries at present,
and
country until 1835, and. taking this into consideration, as
fteelur that had been exhibited, and the
well as the popular
and painful character of the law, he
extremely
trusted the sotprulpogsrit on would not be persisted in, and. that
the bill would become be read a second time that day, but
would shortly the law of the land. (Hear, hear )
Mr.IVALPOLE said that although in Prussia, which
was a Protestant country, marriage with a deceased wife's
sister was legalised, it was also lawful for au uucle,to. marry