The Sun.
London, England, 1857-06-08 00:00:00

as " the invention of a new species of divorce, be-
ing neither separation a mensa et thoro, nor
divorce a vinculo matrimonii, but partly one and
partly the other, taking the defects and imperfec-
tions of both. It was partial and imperfect, like
the divorce a mensa et thoro, and irrevocable like
divorce a vinculo!" * * Substantially treated the
invention, left the husband free, but with the usual
imperfection of all unnatural productions it left
the wife not altogether free, nor altogether
fettered. Part of her chain was removed,
but some links were left clanking round the
rags to which they were pleased to reduce
her. She was not to marry again—she was re-
duced to the alternative of prostitution or want—
of sinning or starving—of the streets or the
workhouse."

What answer can be given to this plain
and straightforward statement ? How is it
consistent with the charity of Him who told the
offender "to go and sin no more." Surely, as
we recently stated, it is " a refinement of Mezen-
tian cruelty to chain a helpless woman to one
who is nominally, but not really a husband," and
still worse is it to bind her irrevocably to one who
may become the husband of another wife ! Besides,
there is no reciprocity ! It is solely directed
against the weaker sex, who in ninety-nine cases
out of a hundred will be the parties subjected to
the unnatural and impolitic prohibition—a pro-.
hibition which renders repentance impossible, and
permits nulls vestigia retrorsum. The woman who
has once sinned, under the strongest temptation,
—who has given such fearful proof of the violence
of her passion, will not abandon herself to the
dreary seclusion of the cloister, but will enter into
open and unblushing crime when the hope of
amendment is taken away.
But the proviso is as strongly opposed to expe-
diency as it is to morality. So far from discou-
raging the chief offenders, it will, as we declared
when the amendment was carried by an Episcopal
majority, directly stimulate them to the commis-
sion of the social outrage. The man was in
the vast majority of instances the principal
offender, and this removed almost the only
check that has hitherto existed by " giving him
an Act of Parliament guarantee against having
to take to his home the accomplice of his guilt."
There are many considerations affecting the female
—that must induce her, at least, to pause before
she abandons herself to sin and shame. She will
be driven from society—for ever forfeit her status.
Her children will be for ever separated from her,
no trifling loss to a mother. Everything dear to
the female heart must be surrendered, and those
sacrifices afford much better security than the pro-
visions so " unjustly, uncharitably, and inexpedi-
ently," added to the bill.
We trust, then, that the opportunity of recon-
sideration which still remains may not be neg-
lected or misapplied—that their Lordships may
yet exclude the clause, before the bill is trans-
mitted to the other House. We have not the
slightest doubt that it will be expunged in
the Commons, but we should regret to see a con-
flict on such a point, between the hereditary and
representative branches of the Legislature—a
conflict which must operate so unfavourably to
their lordships, and n hich may revive the ques-
tion—should bishops be permitted to have seats
in Parliament ?

We are glad t 3 find that the Times has come
round to the views which we put forward on Sa-
turday, respecting the effect of the payment of
the 1,125,0001. to Denmaik for the redemption
of the Sound Dues, on the monetary condition of
the country. On that day the Leviathan rejoiced
that the Chancellor of the Exchequer • " re_
quired no borrowing powers "—that he was.
enabled, in consequence of his own miscalcula-
tions, to pay off the entire sum at once. It was
totally oblivious of the fiscal injustice to the over-
, burdened taxpayers. The more that could be got
of poor Jorn; BULL'S pocket, the greater the
impediments to any remission of the national
burdens, the better. All was couleur de rose, and
Sir G. C. LEWIS was entitled to credit for his
" tarnation sharpness" in obtaining, by something
almost amounting to false pretences, the imposi-
tion of unnecessary duties on tea, coffee, and
sugar, and thereby the means of paying off a sum
that might more properly have been spread over
a succession of years.

But now " a change has come o'er the; spirit of
its dream." When its atterltion has been directed
to the point it perceives that the time is rapidly
approaching when " the last straw " may be
heaped on the patient animal. It was some time
since unwillingly obliged to confess " that
a return to cheap money cannot be an-
ticipated for some years." Every effort that
could be made was inadequate to meet the wants
and exigencies of the nation, occasioned by the
unjust and impolitic act of 1844. It has at
length discovered that " the fact that the
1,125,000/. to be paid to Danmark in redemp-
tion of the Sound Dues will have to be paid in
specie, or its equivalent, within three or four
months, must constitute a new element of distur-
bance in the money•market." Why of course it
must, that was what we explained, and the
Times ignored, on Saturday. There can be buy'
little doubt that Danmark will avail itself of the
favourable opportunity to retain so valuable a
deposit. It is but a specious fallacy to suppose
that the money thus recklessly parted with can
find its way back "through the ordinary channels
of trade." No ; we may learn wisdom in time,
but unfortunately it will be too lute. It will be
another illustration of the folly of " shutting the
stable door after the steed has been stolen."

Large sums are to be paid by other States, but
(as the Times sagaciously remarks) they " will
doubtless avail themselves of the privilege of
making the payments in half-yearly instal-
ments, spread over 20 years, with interest
at 4 per cent. Of course they will. They can-
not.boast of such brilliant financiers as Sir .G.
C. Lzwis ! They have ministers who look
before them, and do not leave the interests
of the country, which they represent to mere
chance. The " disturbance of the Money Market"
was an obvious result of the operation which every
man of ordinary capacity must have foreseen.
Well, we suppose that we must submit to the
evil with the beat grace possible. The day of
reckoning must come earlier or later, and the
sooner the crisis is encountered the better. Not
all the Australian and Californian discoveries
have sufficed to bolster up the system. We
must then at last take the bull by the horns,
and strike at the root of the grievance. We may
well endure an addition to the evil, in the hop,3
that it may lead to a speedy and permanent re-
lease from its exciting cause, the iniquitims
monetary code under which the nation hay, so
long been oppressed, and under which the welfare,
h. •
appmess, and prosperity of its people, as well
as its commercial and manufacturing supremacy,
.are gradually but steadily passing away.

LONDON, MONDAY, JUNE 8, 1857.

----....---

It is deeply to be regretted that Lord
BROVGRAM was prevented by accidental causes
from being in attendance on the 25th ult., when
the Archbishop of Canterbury, carried, by a ma-
jority of 6, a quasi amendment to the Divorce
BA which prohibited the guilty parties from
marrying again. We cannot conceive that their
Lordships could possibly have sanctioned such a
timely and startling illustration of
A curiously
I
proviso had they had the advantage of hearing the necessity for the Sale of Poisons,Bill to which
the convincing arguments' whieh the Noble and , we directed attention in our Saturday evening's
has just transpired. Learned Lord addressed, on Thursday, in oppo- impression spired. The child of a
sition thereto. His Lordship justly denounced it Liverpool merchant having fallen 4 victim to th e