The Sun.
London, England, 1857-07-03 00:00:00

ADULTERER'S MARRIAGE BILL.

Lord REDESDALE, in moving the second reading
of this bill, said that in order to remove the objection
which had been taken to one of the amendments moved
during the recent discussion on the Divorce Bill, that it
would be unjust to require an injured husband or wife to
be married before a registrar, he had confined the opera-
tion of this measure to the guilty parties. Be pimply

Lord CAMPBELL thought the proposal of the noble
lord wholly unparliamentary and unprecedented. A bill
which embraced the whole of thissubject, and from which
this provision had been excluded, had been agreed to by
their lordships, and sent down to the other house, and
would be taken into consideration there. If the other
house thought this particular provision a fair and just
one they would insert it in the bill ; but it would be a
very extraordinary mode of procedure to send down a
rider to that bill in the shape of a proposition which their
!ordships had already rejected two or three times. He
was very much surprised that Lis noble friend, the great
lTr ot c
Re dßn
ur e house,,Rto whom
shouldysad have theythat
if made
oa nll
olookedrTd hoef
Ao
urrdpc ehribnii ns
hmtohpae
ti rtoefrsc lordships'Ao fxp
such a proposition.
any point of order, as had been stated by the noble and
learned
lord, there were a constitutional objection to this
bill, it would, of course, be unnecessary and improper to
urge it upon their lordships. But he must express his
earnest hope that in this or some other mode, eitC er in
this or in the other house, some relief might be afforded
to the clergy, who were seriously affected by the matter
to which it referred. 'Aare was nothing in the principle
of the hill which compromised their lordships by interfer-
ing with what they had already determined—nothing
which was inconsitant with their conduct on other occa-
sions. It was now 20 years since some of those who dis-
sented from the Church made a loud complaint that they
were forced to cel- hrate their ruarriages according to a
service which differed from their religious opinions ;
their lordship, judged the complaint to be reasonable,
and gave a remedy—a remedy which completely altered
the whole law of marriage. The clergy of the Church
now complain that they might be obliged by law to per-
form a service which they believed to be inconsistent
with the Divine command. Re would not now discuss
the question whether they gave a right interpretation to
the Scripture ; but he ma,ntaiced that as long as the
same words remained in Scripture there would always be
many who would so interpret them. Surely it was not
unreasonable to require that persons contracting mar-
riage under the circumstances contemplated in the
Divorce Bill now before the House of Commons should
' be satisfied with a civil contract, content with the privi
lege of a legal marriage and a legitimate issue. The case
became much stronger by the nature of the marriage
service. He was unwilling to allude more particularly to
that service ; indeed, it could hardly be done in connexion
with this subject without the appearance of profaneness.
But their lordships would remember that the service as-
slimed, in solemn terms, the divine approval of the mar-
riage, and that it was divinely ordered. It was true that
charity hopeth all things ; but it passed over the bounds
of charity to pronounce, ex cagedra, the divine approval
of a marriage which had its origin in a guilty passion,
and was brought about by a heinous crime. For these
reasons he trusted that the consciences of the clergy
might not suffer under this trouble, but that, either
would be found.
said that no harm
through this present bill or in some future clause of the
Marriage and Divorce Bill, a remedy
tyranny to compel
Lord REDESDALE, in reply,
would be inflicted on any person by the passing of this
bill. It was a great wantonness of
own
consciences.
the clergy to perform these marriages against their

Their lordships then divided, and the numbers were--
For the second reading—
Contents .................................... 23
Notcontent ......... ...................... 42
Majority against the second reading —22
'ROMAN CATHOLIC CHARITIES BILL.
. .

The house went into conamittoe on this bill.

LLEONARDS, on the ground that the bill
LOonrcdlasurs.e
would interfere very materially with the law affecting
charities, and would ereate a distinction that ought not
to exist between Roman CatholiC property and that of
other denominations, moved that tile bill be referred to
a select committee.
The LORD CHANCELLOR admitted that the bill
was one that was deserving of discussion, but be con-
ceived such discussion could be carried on better in the
house than by a select committee sitting upstairs.
The Duke of NORFOLK thought that the bill should
be referred to a select committee. He had a number of
amendments to propose, and he believed that other noble
lords had given notice of some new clauses.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that after the state-
ment of the noble duke he would not ask their lordships
to proceedbill w
further
then reported,erwiththebil sadlat referredthe t
present mo aoment.
The select
committee
THE SOUND DUES BILL.

The Earl of CLARENDON, who was very imper-
fectly heard, was understood to say that in rising to
move the second reading of the Sound Dues bill he would
not detain their lordships by many observations. The
Sound Dues, as their lordships were aware, arose from
the right inherent in every Power to impose duties or
taxes on the commerce carried on within its own juris-
diction, They had been acknowledged by all maritime
nations in various treaties, which had formed part of the
international law of Europe, for upwards of 300 years.
The first treaty made between England and Denmark
on the subject of these dues bore date of 1491. As com-
merce increased the inconvenience of the tax became ap-
parent, and for many years past attempts had been made
to get rid of it by means of compensation. At the beginning
of last year the Government of the United States gave no-
tice that they would no longer pay the dues. Communi-
cations then took place between the Danish Government
and the various States interested in the matter. A con-
ference was held at Copenhagen, and the Danish Govern-
ment proposed to abolish the dues upon the payment of
-
compensation to the amount of 3,890,0001., which was
apportioned among the different States according to data
furnished by the Dauih Government, of the accuracy
of which there was no doubt. This led to a treaty which
was signed in March last by her Majesty's Government.
By that treaty the amount of the payment to be made by
England was fixed at 1,125,000/. The Danish Govern-
ment also consented to reduce the transit dues over the
Holstein railways. This, however, was a matter of some
difficulty, and led to considerable discussion, the Danish
Government denying the right of the other States to in-
terfere with the management of the Holstein railways,
which was simp'y a point of internal administration.
But the other States contended that they were entitled
to insist upon a reduction of these dues, inasmuch as
they had been imposed for the purpose of compelling
goods to be carried by way of the Baltic instead of
by railways, and so of facilitating the collection of
the Sound Dues, and the result was that the Danish
Government consented to reduce the transit dues by
four-fifths. The amount of Sound Dues paid by
England was about 75,0001. per annum ; but, ac
cording to the statements of the witnesses examined
before a committee of the House of Commons which
sat last year. and especially those of her Majesty's Mini-
ster at Copenhagen, the loss occasioned by the collection
of the tax in the detention of vessels and the necessary
payment of heavy local charges amounted to a much
larger sum, one of the witnesses computing it at 200,0001.
a-year. The committee of the House of Commons to
which he had referred reported in favour of the aboli-
tion of the Sound Dues, and recommended the pro-

Lord PAN gURE said that this bill was similar in
principle to the Police Bill for England passed last ses-
sion. Some of the Scotch counties bad a police force,
but others had neglected to avail themselves of the op-
portunity, and the bill enabled boroughs and districts
,timiorlabine for the purpose-of maintaining an efficient
constabulary force. The Secretary of State would lay
down rules as in England for the pay and clothing of the
force, and the same proportion of one-fourth of the ex-
penditure would be defrayed out of the public exche-
quer. The bill bad been referred to a select committee
of their lordships, who had given valuable assistance in
putting it into proper shape.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH regarded the bill as one
of great importance, for the inconvenience was very
great of having a constabulary force in some of the
Scotch counties and not in others. A power was given
to the Secretary of State to enforce the building of a
lock-up house and stations, but he believed it would he
found that sufficient provision was made herein under
the Prisons Act.
Lord CAMPBELL had no doubt this was an excel-
lent Bill, and that Scotland was very much indebted to
his noble friend for bringing it in. It was eery credit-
able to the Scotch peers and members of Parliaanent that
they met and laid their heads toizether and came to
a sensible decision upon Scotch Bill, before they came
under discussion in Parliament. He hoped that occa-
sion would be taken either to abolish " rogue money" or
to give it a more creditable name. He remembered for
example, that when a monument was erected to a most
meritorious public servant the balance that remained to
be defrayed was paid out of "rogue money." (A. laugh.)
Upon another occasion the dinner bill of some commis-
sioners was defrayed out of the same questionable source.
(A laugh.)
The bill then went through committee.
The Grand Juries (Ireland) Act (1836) Amendment
Bill, the Insurance on Lives (Abatement of Income-tax)
C ntinuance Bill, the Joint-Stock Companies Act
Amendment Bill, and the Town Bylaws' Revision Bill
were respectively read a third time and passed.
The Portland Harbour Bill, the Chatham Lands, kc.,
Bill, and the Militia (Ireland)o Act (1854) Amendment
Bill were severally read `a second time.
CONSOLIDATED FUND (8,000,0001.; BILL.

This bill etas also read a second time and passed
through its remaining stages, the standing orders having
been suspended in its regard.
The Dulwich College Bill, the Oxford University Bill,
the Turnpike crusts' Arrangement Bill, and the Hanley
Borough Incorporation Bill passed through committee.

SALE OF OBSCENE BOOKS, ac,, PREVENTION

BILL.

Lord CAMPBELL gave notice that he should to-
morrow (this day) move the committal of this bill, in
passing which he hoped to have the support of the right
rev. bench, whose sacred calling led them to take so deep
an interest in improving the morals of the people.
The house adjourned at 20 minutes past 7 o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
ELECTION PETITIONS.

The Committees appointed to serve on the Maidstone,
Oxford (City), Tewkesbury, and Bury (Lancashire) elec-
tion petitions were sworn at the table of the house.
The Burial of the Dead within the City and Liberties of
London ; East Somerset Railway ; Great Northern and
Western of Ireland Railway ; London (City) Coal Duties;
Mallow and Fermoy and Great Soutnern and Western
Railways; Milford Improvement; New Brunswick and Ca-
nada Railway and Land Company ; Newquay Pier and
Harbour and Railway; Oldham, Ashton under Lyne, and
Guide Bridge Junction Railways ; Sittingbourne and
Sheerness Railway ; Wexford Free Bridge, and Work-
sop and Attercliffe Road Bills were read a third time
aid passed.
The Clyde Navigation ; Lowestoft and Burgh Saint
Peter Ferry and Roads; Salford 11)r0u,,,h (No. 1) ;
Stockport, Disley, and Whaley Bridge Railway; and
Whitehaven and Furness Junction -Railway Bills were
further considered and ordered to be read a third time.
PAPER DUTY.

Mr. RICARDO asked the Chancellor or the Exche-
quer whether the Government would consider the ques-
tion of granting a drawback of duty on tissue paper in
the pottery manufacture, as in the case of the jacquard
loom cards ?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that he had communicated with the Inland Revenue,
and found that the grounds for the draWback in the
jacquard loom cards did not apply to the paper used in
earthenware manufacture, and it would not be in his
power to recommend the drawback asked for.