The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-25 00:00:00

THE SUN.

LONDON, MONDAY, MARCH 25, 1881.

The EMPEROR has again spoken, and again in
language characterised by the most extraordinary
ambiguity. His reply to Messieurs the Deputies
extends to no more than three sentences or two
paragraphs. Yet within that narrow compass the
Riddle of Europe contrives to compact together
phrases sufficiently enigmatic and bewildering to
mean—just nothing or anything. It is, of course,
perfectly true that still to this day, as when MIL-
TON sang the familiar words originally—

"The oracles are dumb,
No voice or hideous hum,"

being by any possibility audible in the neighbour-
hood of the old ruined fane of APOLLO'S shrine at
Delphos. But so long as his reigning Majesty
NAPOLEON 111. can speak from his throne there,
across the Channel, in the Palace of the Tuileries,
all the oracles are not dumb, there is still
one voice that can be heard speaking most
oracularly—there is literally the " hideous hum "
the poet specifies as peculiar to the old Pythonic
utterances, and all ends here as the oracles of
old ended, according to theblind bard's description,
in "words deceiving." There is one thing, however,
about the Imperial declaration of the present French
Sovereign that when he speaks the most clearly
his assurances are the least to be relied upon. As
when he intimated, as positively as words could inti-
mate anything, that his Government had no inten-
tion whatever—observe, no intention even of secur-
ing the annexation to Fralice of Savoy and Nice—
immediately before that very annexation was actu-
ally accomplished. So that when his MAJESTY deals
now merely in generalities, when he indulges chiefly
in the most ambiguous phraseology there is the
largest amount of probability that something good
may just within the limits of possibility result from
it. Judging of him simply from experience, esti-
mating his policy purely from precedents within
every one's recollection, we might aver quite
frankly and with perfect reason that supposing
the French EMPEROR on Saturday afternoon, in
answer to the loyal address of the deputation from
the Legislative Corps, headed by the President,
had given a solemn assurance that he guaranteed
Peace to Christendom, people might naturally have
looked shortly after Easter for an explosion of
war in Europe that would agitate more or less
all the various Powers of the Continent. The
match having been applied- of course by the
very hand of NAPOLEON himself--the Moderator of
the Revolution ! Inasmuch, therefore, as the
EMPEROR speaks this time not at all plainly, inas-
much as he gives no promise whatever that can be
construed into a promise of peace, there is a hope
therefore left for the maintenance of tranquillity.
"I thank the Chamber," says his MAJESTY, "for
the sentiments which it expresses towards me, and
for the confidence which it places in me." Adding
—autocratically—" If that confidence honours me
and flatters me, I think I deserve it from my con-
stant solicitude of only looking upon questions in a
point of view of the real interest of France." And
then comes, in truth, that " nut to crack "—the
wonderful closing sentence of the Imperial reply
to the address of the Legislative corps on Saturday
afternoon. " To be up to the age," quoth his
MAJESTY, " to preserve of the past all that is good,
to prepare the future by sweeping off the path of
civilisation all the prejudices which obstruct
it, or utopias which compromise—that is how we
%ball bequeath calm and prosperous days to our
children." Whatever anybody may like to make out
of that of course he may. The words may mean,
RS we have said, just anything or they may mean
just nothing. And probably the oracular ruler of
40,000,000 Frenchmen, the enigmatical Captain of
600,000 soldiers,was as satisfied with those marvel-
lous words of his on the 23d at Paris—as President
ABRAHAM LINCOLN himself with that final meta-
phorical flourish of .his on the 4th of this present
month of March at Wasingtoa--that amazing
figure of speech about chords stretching from battle
fields to hearts all over the (shall we say ?) " Union"
—chords play,d upon by the Angel of Everybody's
Better Nature ! An astonishing metaphor likening
the whole of the North American Republic to a sort
of cobweb harpsichord, dreadfully out of tun?, just
now, and with evidently more than one or two

screws loose somewhere. So with this last sentence
from the lips of the French EMPEROR : it is as evi-
dently a pet little rhetorical flourish, as that other
dropped from the mouth of the American PRESI-
DENT. Now that we have got it we must make
the most of it—and chew the cud of sweet and
bitter fancy latent in it with a befitting sense of
gratitude.
So far as any glimmering notion goes that
might thence be afforded as to the probabilities of
that future which the EMPEROR speaks of
in terms so mysteriously generalised—the Imperial
reply to the address of the Legislative Corps, might
just as well never have been uttered. So utterly
blank is it as an index to coming probabilities, or
even possibilities. About Rome, for example, the
oracle is dumb—there is only the voice, as we have
said, the vox et pretorea nihil—excepting only the
" hum" before-mentioned of the " words deceiving."
But, then, the Imperial speaker has obviously his
little game to play between the antagonistic
authorities still confronting each other in the
" almost but not quite" liberated Italian Penin-
sula. Rome all this time being, in NAPO-
LEON'S regard very much like the oyster ad-
judicated upon by that wily Lawyer in the fable
who settled the squabble for its possession between
two disputants by swallowing the oyster himself,
and handing a shell a-piece to those disputants.
Has not the French EMPEROR up to this moment
held possession for ten or twelve years of the Eternal
City ? And does he not now hand the nominal
unification of Italy to his Majesty VICTOR EM-
MANUEL 11., without Rome ! And to his Holiness
Pius IX., the nominal independence of the States
of the Church, minus the States themselves ! These
are the two empty shells handed to the right and to
the left—while the lawyer of sharp-practice is
quietly enjoying the deglution of his oyster in
between the two deluded disputants. A policy
like this, one would have thought (judging from
history) would have been the very last ever to find
favour in once haughty, high-spirited, chivalrous
France. A miserable dodge, a dirty little trick,
like that which a year ago thimble-rigged the pea
of Savoy under the Imperial Crown of NAPOLEON
111., one might have imagined (judging still from
history) must have alienated from a ruler who would
in such a flagrant manner as that speak and act
so very :differently, the affections of a great
nation of Frenchmen: But the address
of the Legislative Caps to the EMPEROR
on Saturday assured his MAJESTY in so many
words 1--" In Savoy and in the county of Nice you
have pacifically, and in virtue of a treaty sane-
tioned by the popular will, restored to the Empire
provinces which had long been friendly, and are
now irrevocably French. In this circumstance
you obeyed the necessities of territorial defence,
the natural consequence of a notable aggrandise-
ment of a neighbouring State ; and your policy, as
firm as it was prudent, has given satisfaction
to France without [certainly a bold asser-
tion this !] without infringing upon European
rights." Assuredly after this, the annexation of
Savoy and Nice to France is—un fait accompli both
with regard to the French people and to their Sove-
reign. It remains with English diplomacy to see
henceforth, at any rate, that Europe is not outraged
either in the direction of Italy or elsewhere by any
similar Napoleonian tricks of annexation.

The decision of the Lords in the case of BnooK
T. BROOK calls for serious consideration of the
practical steps which should be taken in regard to
a considerable number of persons, many of them,
socially speaking, of the highest respectability, who
are now pronounced, by the highest legal Autho-
rity, to have contracted marriages which are legally
null and void, or to be the descendants of marriages
which. leave them, under the inconvenience of
being, in the eye of the law merely, illegitimate.
We shall not waste time in attempting to con-
trovert the interpretation of the law of the land by
such high authorities ; even if their known bias as
Scotch or English Churchmen had something to do
in unconsciously influencing their judgment—there
it is. That it was honest, even if unconsciously
biassed, we have not the smallest doubt. That it
is law now, is certain. One thing is, however, to be
noticed in the judgments, as delivered by all who
spoke at any length—the marriage was confessedly
good, so far as the forms and ceremonies of the con-
tract went ; the lex loci was admitted to be valid to
this extent. But it was held that forms and cere-
monies valid abroad could not cure a defect in the
essentials of marriage, and that the essentials of a
marriage depended, not on the law of the place
where it was celebrated, but on the law of the
country where the persons were domiciled. Fur-
ther, as in all countries all restrictions cannot
be considered essentials, it was necessary to show
that the limitation arising out of the Act of 1835
was of the nature of an essential. The reason
assigned by all the learned Lords was,
that the Legislature enacted the restriction because
marriage between a widower and his deceased's
wife's sister was " contrary to the will of God." As
being so, it was again and again observed, the pro-
hibition to marry in this relation became an essen-
tial. Yet further, it was truly observed that it
was not the business of the judges to decide whether
such marriages were contrary to GOD'S law, but
whether the Legislature, from the time of HENRY
VIII., so regarded them. And on that point there
can be little doubt.

We need hardly say that the vast majority of
intelligent persons now, both laymen and divines,
agree that there was, even to the Jews, no prohi-
bition of the kind proposed—rather the contrary.
And that, therefore, those who invented the canon
Which prohibits the marriage referred to, and those
who, at the Reformation, transferred the canonical
prohibition to our Prayer-book, were equally mis-
taken as to the will of GOD. Hence with far better
reason might the laws against witchcraft, and
those which punished adultery with death, be part
of our legislation, since they were undeniably the
" will of GoD," as addressed to the Jews. It is
now conceded by all, whose opinion is worth the
slightest respect, that it never was the will of GOD
to prohibit a man from marrying his wife's sister,
except during her lifetime, in a country where
polygamy was common. The canon, and its accept-
tance by our reformers, being then confessedly
founded on a misinterpretation of Scripture, even
those who would conform English laws to the laws
of MOSES have lost their own reason for this parti-
cular law. It is acknowledged then that what makes
this prohibition an essential is actually wanting ;
yet our judges feel compelled to treat the prohibi-
tion as based on the will of GOD, not because they
can affirm that it is so, but because their fore-
fathers, in the twilight of a crude reformation,
thought so, and because English law declares it to
be so.

However, what ought now to be done ? Can it
be tolerated that numbers of virtuous and innocent
persons should be subject to serious legal incon-
veniences, because our worthy but half-benighted
ancestors mistook the will of GOD ? The decision
in this case of the highest authorities leaves but one
legal resort—alteration of the law. Is it too much
to hope that the Lords, as legislators, will have the
good sense and wisdom to reverse their decision as
judges? Or rather to pronounce, in the former

capacity, that they can no longer permit to be lawl
what in the'latter capacity they feel bound to affirmi
is law. They have, ministerially, been compelled
to perform the cruel part of inflicting severe penal.
ties on the perfectly innocent—can they be so
heartless as to leave the summa injuria consequent
on their summum jus unredressed ? Or will they
go to the extreme of punishing those who did not.
even intentionally violate the law of their " domi-
cile "—believing, on the authority of legal advisers,
that that Act left them a means of marriage open,
which it might have prohibited directly, and not
through a construction which requires an hour's
judgment to prove it a sound one ? In the case of
those who have married abroad, honestly believing
such marriages to be legal there, it revolts all our
notions of justice that they should suffer for the
obscurity of the Act.
There are, however, thousands besides affected by
the lAw as it stands, who have morally a claim
to release from all the civil penalties under which
they lie. They have indeed defied a law, an Act
of Parliament, but they have not defied the principle
on which the Act is based. They have not defied
the principle which by the confession of all the
learned Lords makes the prohibition an essential
of marriage. They have one and all respected
the will of GOD in the matter. They have
respected what Bishops and Archbishops have
acknowledged to be the will of GOD at least
we doubt whether the most rigid canonist among
the Bishops would pledge his reputation for
Biblical scholarship on affirming that the canonical
interpretation of the old passage in Leviticus is
not a false one. They have obeyed the spirit of
the Act by violating its letter. Three learned
Lords especially declared that conformity to " the
will of GoD" was what the Acts on the subject
sought to attain. This intention of legislation has
also been the intention of the persons who suffer
from rigid construction of the letter of the Act.
We must maintain that such persons are not to be
made the victims of Acts which do not, in the judg-
went of the vast majority of the living, fulfil
their own object.
All such persons may properly be regarded as
dissenters from the canons of their own Church
on this point, although termed Churchmen ; but
their Lordships have to consider the equally
large number of Dissenters who feel it to be a
direct infringement of their religions liberty that
they should live under Canonical and Episcopal
legislation. It is lot denied that, but
for the Canons which Dissenters do not'
acknowledge, but which the Church thus far
accepts, no one would have now dreamed of the
absurd prohibition in question. It is also undeniable
that the Act by which Dissenters are persecuted is
the late Bishop of LONDON'S Act, not Lord
LYNDHURST'S, as it is commonly termed. On the
23d of July, 1858, the venerable Lord, in his place
in the Upper House, declared that the Bill was so
altered in committee in this respect that he could
no longer acknowledge it, and added emphatically
that "the Right Rev. Prelate was infact the author
of the _Bill." Now that the Law Lords have shut
the only door supposed to be open, Dissenters will
certainly not be put down by a Bishop's Act which
inflicts on them penalties because they cannot
conform to what they deem either his High Church,
prejudices or intolerance, or both. Let Bishops,
they will say, inflict penalties if they like, and if
their flocks will submit to it, on contumacious
Churchmen, but let not us who reject the authority
of canons and of prayer-books too, be tied tel
episcopal apron strings.

We hava but one remark more to make. The
country has declared its opinion again and again,'
not only by petitions of unusual weight and
character, and in great numbers considering the
small number of persons affected, but by their
representatives in the Lower House. If this
consideration and the position of several thousand
innocent persons do not move the House of Lords
this session to grant prompt redress, the wronged
parties must consider the best course they can take.
It may be well worth their while to establish an
office to register the marriage contracts of those to
whom the Peers of England alone deny a well
proved right. Such a record of a contract solemnly
made and witnessed will be satisfactory evidence of
marriage to all the parties most interested—and in
time, as in the case of the Society of Friends and
of the Dissenters, register of their own births in
connection with their own places of worship, the
Legislature will be but too thankful to accept such
well-kept registers as valuable evidence of past
marriages. The bigotry of our EXETERS,
OXFORDS, and CIIELMSFORDS—their determination
to make Church supremacy ride roughshod over
Dissent and common sense too cannot last for
ever. All such obstinacy, though tenacious of life,
is mortal in a land of liberty; and, when it gives
up the ghost, the Registrar-General will be grate-
ful for the Registry whieh we venture to suggest.

His Serene Highness Prince Victor of Hohen-
lohe-Langenburg arrived at StVames's Palace on Satur-1
from Germany, in order to attend the funeral of her
Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent. His serene high-
ness left town yesterday afternoon for Windsor.

His Serene Highness the Prince Holstein-
Augustenburg has arrived at Howchin'e Hotel, from
Germany.

The Duke and Duchess of Atholl have arrived at
the St. George's Hotel.

The Duchess (Dowager) of Sutherland and Lady
Blantyre left Stafford House on Saturday for Cliefden, near
Maidenhead, to pass several weeks in retirement.

Lady Susan Vane Tempest, who has sufficiently
recovered from her recent indisposition to leave town, has
gone on a visit to the Marchioness (Frances Anne) of Lon-
donderry at Wynyard Park, near Stockton-on-Tees.
SACRED HARMONIC SOCIETY, EXETER-HALL,—
The usual Passion-Week performance of " The Messiah"
will take place on Wednesday next. Principal singers,
Miss Louisa Pyne, Madame Sainton Dolby, Mr. Sims
Reeves, and Mr. Bentley. The rehearsals of Beethoven's
celebrated grand mass in D aro proceeding so satisfactorily
that it is confidently expected that the work will be pro-
duced at the following concert.

The Council of the Society of Arts have given
to the Female School of Art permission t-) hold an exhibi-
tion of fine arts, in their great room, in the Adelphi, during
the month of June. The profits of the exhibition will be
applied to the building a new school of art. 1
DESTRUCTION BY FIRE OF THE Fox TAVERN,
LAMBETH.—This well Inown tavern, situated at the
waterside, Lambeth, was totally destroyed by fire early on
Saturday morning.

We (Army and Navy Gazette) understand that
officers returning home from India, via the Cape, in charge
of invalids, will be allowed to count as service in Tndia the
three months following the date of their departure from
that country.

It is reported (says the United Service Gazette),
that Rear Admiral Sir 11. Keppel has declined to accept
the command of the South American station, and that, on
being relieved by Sir Baldwin Walker, he will return to
England.

The Master of the Rolls proposes, ou the 16th oft
April, to make a call of 10s. per share on the contributories
of the Deposit and General Life Assurance Company.
RENEWAL OF THE BUILDERS' STRIKE.—We un-
derstand that the bricklayers and masons are about to re•
commence the strike which IN as defeated in 1859. In spite,
of the efforts to introduce other topics into the dispute, it
is virtually the same question as before, namely, a
limi-
tation of the hours of labour to not more than nino. On'
Saturday the workmen employed by Messrs. Lucas and
Kelk and Sir Morton Pete Were to remove their tools and
cease work. From one or two other smaller firms thel
men also " go out." As in the case of the strike at Messrs.i
Trollope's, the masters, it is thought, will adopt the same'
course as in 1859, and close their yards till work is resumed
at Messrs. Lucas and lielk's and at Sir Morton Peto's. In
the case of Messrs. Lucas the strike is particularly unfor-;
tunate, as they are the contractors for the Great Exhibition
building in 1862. The ground has already been broken
at Kensington, and the preparations advanced for laying,
the foundations of the brick walls, but now all is stopped.