The Sun.
London, England, 1820-07-06 00:00:00

[The Tinto)

The proceedings against the Queen hare now reached their
summit. They have risen to that point which her adversa-
ries had long contemplated with hopeless aspirations, but of
which they hardly dared openly to confess their desire.—
Under the title of a " Bill of Pains and Penalties," a Di-
vorce Bill was last night brought into the Upper House.—
This is certainly snore than the country was as yet prepar-
ed to expect ; and if the attempt is not nipped in the
bud by the firmness and virtue of the House of Lords, to
which the Bill is offered, we suspect that our prophecy will
not long want confirmation—that the troubles of the coun-
try were. but just beginning. The preamble to this Bill
will be reacNvith deep attention,and the most acute surprise.
It relates certain rlffences of the Queen (on which we shall
speak hereafter), and then concludes with the proposition
that the marriage subsisting between her and her husband
should be dissolved : as if all that were necessary to in-
validate the most solemn of all human engagements were
the misconduct of one party. We must generalize our argu-
ment in order to avoid giving offence. The law of di-
vorce, as it exists in this Christian country, is founded on
the word of God, and the law of the Gospel. Bat the law
of the Gospel makes no allowance for rank or station,—af-
fords no indulgence, no exemptions, no privileges; neither,
therefore, can the law of divorce. Now, the law of divorce
separates, upon substantial proof, a pure man from ass im-
pure woman ; but it does not allow, nor ever has allowed,
nor ever can allow of the separation of two impure people
at the option of either. WT. do not impute to his Majesty an
impure life, either during his cohabitation with the Queen
or since she quitted him ; but we do aver, that a Bill of
Divorce, founded upon the simple misconduct of one
party,—the cooduct of the other not being allowed to be
examined or inquired into,—is a violation of the law of
God, as it is modified and applied to the sacred marriage
rite. Be the Queen's conduct what it may. his Majesty
must show an unimpeachable title to relief, or must allow
that title to be scrutinized before relief can be afforded him;
or otherwise there is an end at once of all the sacred solem-
nity of the marriage contract : fur ill examples do not
amount from the humble to the great, but descend (runs
people in elevated stations to the crowd. A Bill of Pains and
Penalties is one thing, even suppose such a Bill had impri-
soned the Queen fur life, or had banished her from the king.
dons: but a divorce, a dissolution of the nuptial bond, is a
measure of a totally different nature ;—it does not punish
guilt ; it sets loose from a disastrous obligation. Let it be re-
collected, that the man as well as the woman engages on his
knees, before the altar of Gon, that, " forsaking all others,
" he will keep himself only to his wife so long as they both
shall
u lice." that 11.. King has not done
this;
fulfilment of his obligation is
obviousl
a necessary and unalienable condition of the dissolution of
t do
thatwt
t saylse
the marriagi; and that it is impious to dissolve the marriage
without allowing sit what is improperly called recrimination,
but which is really cal• a controverting of the plaintasclairn
to relief.