The Sun.
London, England, 1857-08-01 00:00:00

THE SCHOONER MARIA.

In answer to Mr. J LOCKE,
Lord PALMERSTON said that the seizure of a Bri-
tish vessel by the Venezuelan Government was now
under consideration by Lord Clarendon.
In answer to Sir J. PAKINGTON,
Lord PALMERSTON said he was not aware that
Sir Charles Napier had addressed any paper to the In-
dian Government upon the organisation of the India❑
army beyond ;hat which was already referred to, an,l
extracts from which were produced, but as Sir John
seemed to think there was another, he would make fur-
ther inquiries.

Some conversation occurred in explanation of s'Ate-
ments made on the Indian debate on Monday last, in
which Mr. Whiteside, Mr. Vernon Smiih, Sir E. Colt.-
brooke, Mr. Mangles, Sir C. Wood, and others took
part, but which led to no result.
DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES BILL.
On the order of the day for the resumption of the ad-
journed debate. •

Messrs. BOWYER and HOPE severally presented peti-
tions against the bill.
Mr. GLADSTONE—Sir, in justification of the course
which was adopted last week when a considerable por-
tion of this house demanded further time for the consi-
deration of the marriage question, I could not appeal to
anything more conclusive than the course which the pre-
sent debate has taken. Last week, when the noble lord
at the head of the Government was told that the subject
could not be fairly or fully considered during the present
session, or at toe present advanced period of the session,
he replied, on the contrary, that he saw no rea3on why
the debate could not be carried on with the same ear-
nestness and force as at any other time ; adding, that if
necessary, the duration of the session might be extended
to an indefinite period. But in the course of last evening
what did we witness? There was no unkindness certaitly
on the part of the house, but such a state of lassitude as
was entirely unconquerable, and which made it quite
impossible for many gentlemen to state their opinions.
After the speech of my hon. and learned friend the At-
torney-General, with the exception of the hon. member
for Hertfordshire, the speeches were all one side, eight
gentlemen in succession speaking against the bill—a
circumstance almost unparalleled, according to my re-
collection of the practice of the House of Oommons. I
shall not speak of the ability of these speeches : because
perhaps,l may be looked upon as a partial judge ; but
any one will admit their earnestness, while the magni-
tude of the subject cannot be denied. And yet it re-
mained, as I have said, a one-sided debate, and the
sense of impatience which was exhibited on any allusion
to the possibility of a division, was at last consummated
by the declaration of the Secretary of State, who actually
complained that the division did not take place last
night, adding that there were symptoms of premeditation
connected with the prolongation of the debate. (S:r G.
GREY made an observation.) My right boo, friend
as I understand, adheres to the word, and is not sorry he
used it. The right hon. gentleman never saw clearer
signs of premeditation. Does he think that the signs of
premeditation were greatest on the part of those who,
under circumstances of great discouragement, discharged
what they deemed to be a conscientious obligation, or
with those who when this great and new and most im-
portant subject was before the house remained systema-
tically silent, in order that they might arrive at a divi-
-ion. I do not lay a charge or blame upon any one, for
this is toe serious a subject for party recriminations. It
is not a subject upon which to make concessions to party
prejudices, or to offer praise or blame to any Govern-
ment, and I have not said what has escaped me to cast
blame onany one, but rather to ask ju-tice for those whe
stated that this great question was one which it would
be impossible to do justice to under the circumstances in
which it is now pressed on us. It may be said that the
argument is all one way, and that the speeches opposed
to the Government bill contained nothing that was de-
serving of an answer, but that might be said in any de-
bate, and besides is not the view taken by those whose
opinions are worthy of all consideration. It is considered
that the circumstances under which this b.ll is pressed
forward are unusual and unprecedented, and that those
who oppose it do so not only in deference to their own
sense of duty, but in obedience to a very strong feeling
on the part of large bodies of their fellow-subjects. We
are called upon to discuss a difficult and important sub-
ject, at a period of the session at which for 20 years such
a subject has not been laid before Parliament. We are
not at tended to when we ask for time to obtain the ordi-
nary information connected with the subject, its figures,
or details, but I hope we shall be attended to when we
say that the house is proceeding in ignorance of a strong
feeling on the part of the country, whenever an oppor-
tunity has been been given for eliciting that feeling.
It is in vain to say that all this ought to have been
known before. The circulation of information, after all
the accelerations of modern inventions, is not very rapid,
at least of that sort of information which brings a
subject completely home to those who are interested ;
but still a strong feeling has been excited, and I must
spend some minutes in giving the house a sample of the
way in which people are moved, and also in showing
how the conduct of Government, in pressing forward
this bill, has checked and prevented the preparation of
petitions. I have myself received letters stating that Go-
vernmeat appeared determined to press on this bill, and
that theref ire the writer must forward his petition with
such signatures as he could hastily collect. One gentle.
man writes from Cornwall that it it were not for the
shortness of the time he could get his petition sigeed by
8 10th of the population of the parish. He says that the
labouring classes are against the bill to a man, and also a
large proportion of the middle classes. Another writes
from Lincolnshire, that the bill as it came down from the
Lords is thoroughly hateful in the eyes of the great mass
of the middle classes and the poor, eminently so amongst
all church people, but very markedly so amongst religi-
ous dissenters. From Suffolk I learn that all classes are
against the bill, one poor man making the remark, that
instead of the marriage vo v running, " until death da
us part," it should be, "until we two quarrel." The
writer who forwards a petition, adds, that the signatures
would be trebled if a little time were allowed. Another
writes from Wantage that it would be impossible to ex-
aggerate the state of feeling in his district. In short I am
certain that neither the Government nor the Parliament
has any cAmeption of the danger that exists of tamper-
ing with this law, or of the number of honest men, fathers
of families, who are hostile to the change proposed, I
dare say it may be alleged that the people complaining
do not know what are the provisiona of the bill. Very
true; but can there possibly be a batter ground for ask-
ing more time? I have no doubt that that is the case; in
fact, I have seen it in the letters of educated persons, and
it is the only point upon which [ have the slightest com-
plaint to make of the Government. It is not consistent
with the general rule of Par:iament that such a mea-
sure as the present should be in such a way forestalled.
What is the reason that it is so forestalled ? It is not
surely the importance of settling a question in which a
few individuals may have an interest ? My nolle friend
the member for Lynn seemed to know more about mo-
tives than most of us, and told us ingeniously his reason
why the bill should be proceeded with. It is forsooth
that we may have something to show for our session.
,erie heeesnty of not presenting a blank list to the coun-
ty, is the reason why the bill is to be pressed forward
under the present unfavourable circumstances. I say
that we have,
I subject, lest it no right to make character for this house
in that manure
idle, and that in the said
-sho,Vilde
bare not to hurry on an important
cut of doors that we were
estimationme
etb of the public we should
lose caste. Believe
, tien of our countrymen
I
the true and la3ting estima-
sheeasnres through. the
ahnadvWeyi
bdoecrUomaenld durability of
( rapidity 4 with which Weill,tlrr after
all, depend, not on the
witLwt;,
house, but on the criality
those measures when they
But it is
said that we cannot approach this bill
ing the alternative, without. consideri: g eam'telic'ansalbdeeert:
the previous practice of
.Parliament, which, as stated by
my bon, and learned friend, bas been in the habit of