The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-06 00:00:00

If this Bill passed, what would be the practical effect ?
In Ireland and Scotland those marriages would not be
solemnized more frequently than at present, inasmuch
as the people in those parts of the kingdom looked upon
them with repugnance.—(" Divide, divide.") But it
would be otherwise in England. For these reasons, and
because he thought it was a question of religious liberty,
he would support the Bill.
Mr. COi3DEN had watched the tenderey of this
question for several years, and he thought the agitation
out of doors had arisen from ecclesiastical and religious
feeling, and had mainly been confit el to the Church
of Eegland.—(No, no.) Ha repeated it, that the
main element in the opposition to this measure
had originated with a party in the Church of England,
who sought to carry us back to ancient time', and to re-
vive obso!ete forms in the Church. There was a party
who Lad taken part in those discussions who contended
that they had scriptural authority against those
marriages. He would have this question discussed
apart from biblical authority.—(ilear, hear.) Tire
lion. Gentlemen (Mr. Sheil), wanting facts and argu-
ments, fell on the religious argument. Ho said the
people of Scotland aid Ireland were opposed to those
marriages; but ho (sir. Cobden) contended the Bill did
not compel the people of Scotland and Ireland to recog-
nise the validity of those marriages. He submitted
that the Jews had never put the construction
that had been contended for on the verse in
Leviticus which had been introduced into this debate.
If they abandoned this principle they would incur
nothing less than a violation of religious liberty. He
said therefore they would, if they opposed this Bill, be
violating the first principle of civil and religious liberty.
—(Hear, hear.) Why, the Baptists and Independents
unanimously regarded this as a matter of religious
liberty.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman relied
upon the Levitical law. They should take the opinion
of Dr. Adler, ;the head of the Jewish persuasion. If
au did not take ;the opinion; of Dr. Adler, they
would take an opinion which was totally opposed to that
of all those by whom he was placed in his present posi-
tion.—(Hear.) Had they forgotten the petition which
was presented by the Noble Lord the Member for
London, which was signed by perhaps the most
influential body of men that had ever attached their
signatures ; o such a document?—(Cries of "Hear,
hear.") Oae Honourable Member had reprobated the
tedtions which had been presented for the Bill, and stated
that those meetings had been got up for the purpose of
excitement; but had they heard of any meetings on the
other side? None such had been held; and the fact had
been over and over again proved that the not holding of
those meetings had shown that there was no public feel-
ing whatever out cf doors on this subjeot.—(clear.) The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Member for Sheffield
had, in beautiful language, told them that the passing
of this Bill would be a desccraion of the holy
and disinterested affection which now existed between
brother and sister, but he found from that blue book
that, in numerous instances, the dying wife had re-
quest =d that her husband should choose her sister as the
guardian for her children, and when the lion. and
Learned Member for Dungarvon talked of walking over
a wife's grave to the eltar, it was simply stating that
which was a manifest error.—(flcar, hear.) Whae
were they legislating for ?—not for those who were
in the heyday of passion, but for the widower
whose first care was to provide for his mother.
less children. And who could provide for them,
who could so care for them as the sister of a deceased
wife—who so likely to inherit her virtues and to care
for her children?—(Hear, hear.) The religious portion
of the question had been abandoned—(Cries of " Hear,
hear" and "No, no")—and it must be abandoned—
(Hear, hear)—and they had, therefore, no ground to go
upon—at least in that House—but the social and
political grounds.—(Cries of "Hear, hear.") Upon
the principle of those grounds alone could they
decide it; and if they did net assume those grounds,
what value could they put upon the representations of
the Dissenters and the petitions E f the women of
E gland?—(Hear, hear.) Ii they refused to grant this
Bill, then would every woman be degraded, and hence-
forth no woman would ever attach her name to a peti-
tion to that House.—([fear, hear.) The refusal of this
motion would be an invasion of the religious and civil
liberty of the people, and on that account he should give
his stcenueus support to the Bill.

Mr. GOULBURN Eaid ho felt bound to give his
strong and most earnest denial to the proposition, which
was so absolutely contrary to the facts of the case, that
religious considerations ought to be excluded from the
consideration of the question. Ile still adhered
to the opinion which he had formerly expressed, that
the law cf Leviticus clearly prohibited marriage with a
deceased wife's sister. This prohibition had been main-
tained by all who had administered the Levitical law.
At the period of the Reformation, those who translated
the Bible, and cleared away some of the rearietions
which previously existed, continued to retain the re-
striction as to such marriages. If the Bill were
baked, he felt convinced that it would not carry into fa-
milies that peace and comfort which some Members had
mentioned, but, on the contrary, he theught that mar-
riages of this description would give rise to the greatest
evils, and that in whatever way the Legislature might in-
terfere, people would still continue to abide by the Di-
vine law according to their own conscientious convictions.
Believing these marriages to be at variance with the law
f God, he would give this Bill his most zealous oppo-
sition.

Mr. S. 'WORTLEY having shortly replied,
strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared--
For the second reading of the Bill ... 182
Against it ... ... 130
Majority fur the second reading ... --52
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed on 'Wednesday next.
The other orders cf the day were then disposed of,
and the House adjourned at Six o'clock.