The Sun.
London, England, 1857-07-30 00:00:00

VOTING l'01? DIVORCE'.

A writer in a contemporary says :—" The Mar-
riage and Divorce Bill bas passed the Lords and
come down to the Commons. In the course of it.;
progress petitions and protests for and against it
have occupied public attention. The result among ,
many excellent and conscientious persons is a cer-
tain amount of confusion of mind as to the objects
and the results of the bill, insomuch that many ale- •
ayar to think that voting for the bill is voting for;
divorce in general and for facility of divorce in par-
ticular. If Mr. Dodd, Mr. Forster, or Mr. Burke,
or any of the compilers of our Peerage I,sts, would
extract from those aristocratic and popular volumes
the names of all the great families in which di-
vorces have taken place, and the names of those .
who legitimately inherit as the offspring of mar" •
riages made of er divorce, it would go far towards
convincing recalcitrant minds that nothing new 15
proposed to them except the form -by which an
already established result is to be obtained.
" If those parties who protest against the Di- •
vorae Bill can conscientiously say that they do not
believe it ever was or can be in the power of the
English .Parliament to sever those who have been
united by the Church ; that they do not believe in
the power of so enabling them to contract second'
marriage, nor, as a consequence in the legitimacy
of those who bear some of the titles and inherit
much of the property of great families in England;
if voting members consider that the clergymen
who, in obedience to decrees of •divorce in Perlia-
ment, remarried those divorced partiesmerely went
through a vain empty form, for. which they are
highly cen,urable before God and man, then ill
God's name let them vote atrainst the bill. Bet it
they bel eve the past marriages of divorced persons'
set down as valid in Registers and Peerages to be
valid in point of fast, if they admit the legetimael,
of heirs' made legitimate by legislative divorc s ;
they admit that the clergy can remarry divorcede
persons as they can remarry parties released by the,
widowhood of death ; then they will perceive that,
no more is asked of them than to transfer to a com
petent legal court a power already acquiesced iu by
them as existing in the House of 'Lords ; and, by
the transfer of that power, to render less compli-
cited, less indecent, less expensive, and less uujusts
the proceedings by which divorce is to be attained-
It the actions for crim. con., the absurb anomalies.
of the position of separated wives and husbands'
the terrible scandal of quarrels and struggles per'
s'sted in for a series of years, the oppression and
lam?ntab'e ill 'usage in a multitude of cases quoted
by Lords Lynd'hurst, Brougham, and other autho-
rities, appear to them a fit, just, or inevitable con-
dition of things in these would..be reforming and
progressive times, then let them vote against reformin the marriage laws. But it they believe the state
of the law on these matters to be liable to the
greatast abuse for want of some established rule
and competent authority and that the interference
of the Reese of Lords in special and wealthy cases,
in no way mends this condition of things, but, on,'
the contrary, produces the stranges anomalies, and
creates "confusion worse confouecled," then let
them vote for the establiahmen at of Court of,
Divorce, and refuse any longer to see the sacredness •
of the ties which fence in peace in our English).
homes played for like a gamblers' stake ;—no
no order, no authority ; a wild skirmish ; a duel ot
souls irntead of bodies ; and the House of Lords
releasing a favoured few who can buy freedom from
&se, y or impimity in sin.
" I repeAt that the question now before the House
of Commons is not a question of the possibility of
divorce, but of the method of divorce. is the method
of divorce as at present in use in England one that
satisfies just, ie asonable men ? That is the question
at i-sue, and let all these who are voting for any
change be aware that it is a change of method they
are voting for, and not a change of principle ; for
the principle will centinue to be acted upon should
no change whatever of method take place ; and,
should the bill now before the Commons be thrown
out to-morrow, it would in no way touchthe•pownr
of divorce assumed by the Legislature, nor prevent
divorce bills passing the Lords, and marriages un-
der those divorce bills being legally solemnised to
at present. Such voting would mend nothing ; it
would only be tantamount to the sentence—" Lot
the old abuses stand."

Country DlR.,rlr.c.ts.

EDINBURGH RAY AND STRAW MARKET.
JULY 28.

Supplies of all kinds these last six days large.
Oat straw, from 78 Od to 9s 0,1 per kempte of 16 stone.
tron ; wheat do., 5s Od to Ss Od ; barley do.. 5,, 6.1 to
Od. Hay from is iii to is 4d; new do., 9d to 10d.

EDINBURGH MEAL—JULY 28.
There were in the market today 11 sacks oatmeal. each
weighing 28015 imperial, which sold at 43s and -- a 01.
DALitEITH MEAL MARKET—JULY 27.
There were in the market to-day 10 bags of oatmeal, ocf
barleymeal, and 0 pot bailey. Sales dull.
Oatmeal, per sack of 2301bs :First. Second. I Third.
imperial
Barleymeal, per ditto -a 01 —8 01 —a 0
Peasemeal, per ditto
Flour, new, per ditto.... —s Od —s Od —s 04
Pot-barley, new, per ditto —s Od a Od