Star.
London, England, 1823-06-04 00:00:00

his ally in opinion no less a parson than the very fit..
Ecclesiastic in the land; this, also, he had for ano-
ther ally the Noble Earl at the head of his Majesty's
Government ; he had also an Ecclesiastical Jude;
and all agreed in this—thatno man should putasunder
those whom Gov had joined by his revealed law
Were those allies then sincere is the cause he espotu
with diem, or was it intended to begiuile the put
mind into a persuasion so proper? Again, he '
presumed that the general opinion of the House went
with him, a, fat as the doctrine that when marriages
were •otentilised they never could be dissolved or
voided. He had now stated so fully the opinions of
those Noble Lords whom he formerly had counted as
his allies, that there remained but little for himself to
add. Wa, it either wise or fitting, or tending to the
decorum of civilised life, to bring forward laws op-
posed to the injunctions of Goo? He, therefore, put
it distinctly to their Lordships how far marriage was
to be set at nought, even as it respected the office of
the Clergy ; for when the sacred rite had been per-
formed, and the solemn benediction had been pro-
nounced by the officiating Priest, were the parties to
lead a religious life together, or the woman to be
consigned to immorality, and their offspring to de-
gradation and beggary? When he came to the legal
part of the Bill, enacting that minors should not
marry at all without the consent of parents or of
guardians, though he agreed to the principle, et,
again, let their Lordships see how the present Bill
was likely to work. The object of the Bill implied
five questions to be asked and answered; as—who
was the father of a minor ; what also was the state of
the mother; then, if the minor's own mother (say the
minor a girl) were secretly married, and whether her
lover's mother, being a wido*, were married in se-
crecy too. Such questions as these, which even a
Judge might be unable to decide, were, however, to
be put roundly to a young lady " full of the thoughts
of a husband ;" and yet her replies might invalidate
her own nuptials, and destroy her peace. As to con-
sent in marriage, with regard to parents or guardians,
those Mho had attended to the Ecclesiastical Courts

could hardly find what the meaning of consent was.
Next core the question as to age; and here if the
lady w ere two days older than she supposed herself
to be, while her suitor was only two days younger
than it had been represented to him, the marriage
was to.
a become void. Again, was the consent of pa-
rents and guardians to be implied or written ? There.
was no provision for the alternative in this case. He
wanteJ t.' know, also, in what state the husband was
to be placed during this temporary occupancy of the
person of the wife? Could he buy or sell land, or
alienate it,- or make any kind of arrangement as to
propeity that would afterwards be valid by law?
The LORD CHANCELLOR rose to a point of
Order, and arrested the attention of the Noble Earl.
The -Nrthle and Learned Lord observed, that he ap-
piehemied that the NolAe Earl (Westmoreland) was
not strictly in order, and he was confirmed by the
opinion of Noble Lords around him. It was not ac-
cording to order for any .Noble Lord, while the House
was proceeding to go into one, and that Committee
net being yet sitting, to move that it should be an
instruction to the Committee to omit one particular
clause: If such a practice were .allowed, then it
mould.he competent fur other Noble Lords to move
the omission clime after clause, and thus their

Lordships would never get into a Committee at all.
The Earl of WESTMORELAND-If, after what

has ilillen from the Noble and Learned Lord upon
the Woohack, I can bring myself to order, isball move
your Lordships to go into a Committee on the Bill.
Lord ELLENBOBOUGH was of opinion, that
their Lordships had an eirial right to move for omis- '
sions as for insertiodsi when proceeding to Coat-
mittees on Bills.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, the usage was that
in a Bill before the House, a Noble Lord might move
for the introduction of a new clause, or even of a new
principle; but that the discuision of the clauses of a
Hill could not take place upon the question of going
into a Committee.
Lord ELLENI3QRQUGU objected to the discus-
sion, because it comprehended the introduction of a
new principle.
The Earl of HARROWBY also deprecated dis-
mission, which was nothing but a waste of the time of
the House.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said a few words
that were inaudible below thellar.
• The Earl of WESTMORELAND wished to know
what were the.legal rights and powers which a hus-
band should possess over the property of his wife, and
what was to become of the proceeds of any sale of
her property by him. Suppose that a woman should
be possessed of personal property at the time of her
marriage, what was to become of it? Was her trus-
tee to be responsible ?—Was the Bank Director to be
responsible for the proceeds of stock disposed of by
the husband defesto? In the case of real estate si-
milar difficulties would arise. It appeared to him
that by a certain understanding between a man and
his guardian he might not only receive the proceeds
of the sale of his estate, but also have his estate hack
again. The facilities by which secret marriages could
now be effected were notorious, so that to any person
so inclined another marriage was practicable even on
the very day on which his guardian might commence
proceedings for annulling a previous marriage. He
should conclude by observing, that if an unhappy
young woman should make a mistake .in her own
age, or the number of witnesses who had been pre-
sent at the marriage of her parents, she was without
a remedy in case her husband should take advantage
of any one of these grounds, and seek to have the
marriage declared void. For these reasons he (Lord
Westmoreland) should oppose the clause.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH hoped the Noble Earl
would not divide the House upon the clause. Al-
though he should not say that the Bill was perfect,
yet he would support the motion for its being com-
mitted. He pledged himself, however, to object to
the Bill, if, on its coming out of the Committee, that
clause should still forst. part of it. .
Lord POWERSCOUIIT opposed the Bill.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee
on the Bid.—Several clauses were agreed to.
Upon the clause being put which authorized the
publication of bruins. its c
• Toe Bishop of CHESrass'aid... that although be
was.oue of the lasz.persona I. the world who would
encroach upon the tights of incumbents, yet, as much
advantage would arise from the proposed clause, he

pat ish
situate for at least lfteen days.
' Lord ELLENBOROUGH contended that with
the proposed omission the clause would be extremely
unjust —The Amendment was negatived and the
clause agreed to.
The Marquis of BUTE moved, that at the end of
each year an authenticated list of the persons married
in Chapels should be transferred to the parish Church,
and registered in the parish books.
After a few words from Lords STOWELL, LIVER•.
POOL, and REDLIDALT, and the Bishop of Cnzstn,,
in opposition to the motion,
The Marquis of BUTE, yielding to the arguments
of Noble Lords, consented to withdraw his motion.
He was of opinion that it would be a matter of con-
venience if marriages were to be registered in the pa-
rish books, in the manner which he had proposed.
The clause which declared Ministers not punish-
able for celebrating the marriage of minors, not hav-
ing notice of that fact, was then proposed.
After a conversation, in which the Loan CRANCEL•
ton, Lords WESTMORELAND and Powaftwoonur,
and the Bishop of &imps took part,
Lord STOWELL-moved, that on the Ist of No-
vember the clause should take effect; which amend-
ment being carried, the clause was agreed to, as were,
several others.

On the clause which declared marriage void where
the parties should not be married in Church, or with-
out banns or license, being proposed,
The LORD CHANCELLOR wished the Clergy-
man should be relieved from the penalties imposed
by the clause.
The Earl of WESTIVIORELAND opposed the
clause. •

The LORD CHANCELLOR said, it would be
almost impossible for the Clergyman to have the
knowledge requisite to enable him to avoid incurring
the penalties of the clause. No doubt the Clergyman
Ought to take special care to be informed of the si-
tuation of the parties; but on the otherland, the no-
lice ought to be so framed as to give him full know-
ledge of the necessary particulars. Since he came
into the office which be had the honour to hold, se-
,era' Clergymen had applied to be relieved from pe-
mashies which they had innocently incurred.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH concurred in the sug-
gestion of the Noble and Learned Lord.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL entirely agreed with
his. Noble and Learne4 Friend, and thought the no-
tice bught to be dated.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that marriages
Wok place daily without any uptice being given. In
the time of his predecessor, some of the most respect-
able Clergymen of the day applied to him for relief,
and were informed by that Learned Lord that the
publication of the banns by them was evidence of I
their having wilfully disobeyed the Act of Perlin-
meat. He (Lord Eldon) thought the Clergyman
ought to be relieved.
The ARCHBISHOP of CANTERBURY sup-
ported the arguments of the Noble and-Learned Lord,
and supposed a case where a Clergyman might be•
called upon, for the first time, to publish banns, and
*ho, from inexperience, was unable to discover that
the necessary forms had been attended to.
The clause, with the proposed amendment, will
then agreed to.
The next clause proposed was, that the marriages
of minors might be declared void within twelve
months from their solemnization.
The ARCHBISHOP of irCatit had last year de
dared it as his opinion- that marriages duly r,olem•
nixed ought not to be broken. At the commence-
ment of tire marriage ceremony, the parties are ie.
lemnly asked by the Clergyman whether they know
of any lawful impediment to their marriage? and on
their answer depended whether the marriage should
or should not be celebrated. In order to render a
marriage perfect, there must exist no lawful impedi-
ment to it. To apply those principles to the clause
then under consideration of the Committee he had
great objection to make the marriage of minors void.
in point of morality, such a declaration tended to
produce injury to society; affecting at the same time
the parties in a peculiar and severe manner. It was
calculated to-encourage dissolute minors to seduce
women under the garb of matrimony. Looking it
the question as afibeting the &grafts& marries es of
minors, what would be the state of suspense and
anxiety in which the parties would remain for twelve
smooths, lest their marriages should or should not be
a settlement for life? He would most willingly sup-
port any measure haring for its object the prevention
of marriage by minors abort of annulling a froxejide
marriage. On the whole of the case, painful as it was
to him to object to any part of a Bill that had re-
ceived the high sanction of his Noble and most elo-
quentPriernd, yet he feltit his duty to oppose this clause.
The Earl of ILO6SLYN moved, that the Chai
do report progress, and ask leave to sit again on
Thursday, for the purpose of discussing the clause.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL opposed the motion,
as inconvenient.
The Bishop of CHESTER oppose& the dense. It
appeared to him that the marriage contrestwos not
only a religious but a-civil contract. It was refialk
inasmuch as the parties pledged themselves re.
Goo that nothing but death shenlsl sewage them..
The law of the land declared that insevisetes should
be celebrated in church, and directed oche; forms..—
It, therefore appeared to him that persona were
bound to obey all the laws of the load, with. rasped
to the marriage state, as far as these went not sum
trary to the law of GOD. it appeared to him the tin
clause then before the Committee vies watt " to the
spirit of our religion, and mold net Heelers be
binding. Our Divans LIKMMIJITQA bag- madames
man should leave his father and mot** and elenatti
onto his wife, iitti:ll -
meaning uf those
Our 7
swayigr

PmaPtit
when -

the laws

_....stages of minors by banns invalid. These
derations, among many others, compelled him to
object to this clause, and to tern the Divine pre-
cept, es Those whom Goj has joined together let not
luau put asunder."
'The LORD CHANCELLOR said, according to
the doctrine laid down by the Right Reverend Pre•
late who had just sat down, all marriages celebrated
in pursuance of the Act of 1756 were not valid, be-
cause by that Act additional ceremonies were re-
quired to make good a marriage solemnised in the
way usual before the passing of that Act, and mar-
riages which were then considered solemnized accord-
ing to the law of Goa. The question here was
trot whether Parliament could Kat asunder those
whom GOD had joined together; bat the. question
was, how were the parties joined put asunder? He
did not think the Right Reverend Prelate could find
in the Old or New testaments any passage which
precluded society from ordering the observance of
certain forms at the solemnisation of marriage. If
there was a passage which could bear such a coc-
struction, he must say that there was not a Christian
nation upon earth which was not most inexcusable t.
because there was not a Christian nation which had
not frequently prescribed certain forms for the so-1
lemnization of marriage. He did not believe even
that the law of the Church declared that society could
not prescribe what *forms they pleased. He wished
the Right Reverend Prelate would reconsider the
conclusions to which his reasoning would lead, and
be was satisfied that the Right Reverend Prelate, for
whose opinion he (the Lord Chancellor) enteitained
the highest respect, would see that his reasoning•
would warrant conclusions which he had never con..
templated. He should not at present give any opi-
nion upon the clause itself, but should wait to hear
the opinions of those Noble Lords who were better
acquainted with the subject than he was. Every
Noble Lord who had spoken, spoke with great ten--
dcrness of the seduction of the female ; but he thought
that the seduction of the male deserved some consi-
'deration ; and he could assure Noble Lords, that if
they had the opportunities which the office which he
had the honour to fill gave him, they would find in-
stances of seduction by a female not unusual. He
would suppose the case of a bricklayer's daughter of
$2 Years of age, who, having half a dozen of
mate children, should seduce a minor, aged 17, the
son of a person of large fortune, and he would ask
Noble Lords would not such a case deserve grave
consideration? He wished that Noble Lords would
turn their minds to the- consideration of male seduc-

tion, and they would then be of opinioe, that male
minors were entitled at least to some protection. He
would conclude by saying again, that if the doc-
trines maintained by the Right Reverend Prelate
were to be acted upon, nine-tenths of the present Bill
must be struck aut.
The Bishop of CHUM said that he admitted
the laws of man were to regulate marriage, when
those laws did not oppose the laws of Poo.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, after the fullest
consideration which he was, able to give this clause,
he must confess that the opinion which he entertained
last year was unchanged. His objection to this clause
was not a religious, but a moral objection. He agreed
with the Right Reverend Prelate that marriage was
an institution of Gel), but he was certain the Scrip-
tures left it to every country to prescribe the forms to
be observed., Upon moral grounds hi would ratter
make marriages easy than difficult. He thought the
Noble Lord who framed this clause had, by wishing
to avoid the difficulty of nullity, fallen into a greater
difficulty. If the clause were to declare that mar-
riages not solemnised with certain forms were null
hid void, it would be intelligible; but he thought it
ghly preposterous to introduce actlause which placed
'parties who had gone to the altar in such a situation
that they could not say for some time whether they
Were married or not. He knew that voidability was not
* innovation, because, according to the old law, con-
songuinity was a ground of voidability; bat he would
41.1 p.
_that he had never spoken to a man who con-
ired. the *abject that did not say that the law ought
ko be altered in that respect. The object of this
those, it was said, was to uphold parental authority.
Re ha-1 as anxious a wish as any Noble Lord to up-
held parental authority, but for that purpose be
khought this clause nugatory, whilst there was no
Clause declaring that marriage contracted in Scot-
land, on the Contineot, or in cos:Nuance: of the pub-
lieatjon.of banns. was voidable. He agreed with the
Noble and Learned Lord that soma consideration
ought to be had for the seduction of males by females;
but their Lordships ought to guard against the greater
evil; and he believed that Noble Lords would agree
with hint, that in 19 cases out of Ile the. seducer
would be found to be a male. He felt strongly for
a parent or a guardian, but he was satisfied that, p.
nerally speaking, whets a marriage was once solem
tined, less evil, would arise from declaring it iudia-
'soluble lima from declaring it voidable ; and balsas
-also satisfied, that it would 'be acting more humanely
'towards parents and guardians not to give them thil
;power of making. marriagervalid or voidable; as
;for his own port he declared; that if he-were plead
ill the situation of .a parent or a guardian c;e111111
Owed by this dew" he should rather not have the
optioa. 'Under all the circumstances, be thought it
'better to revert to what Was-the old Marriage Law
,of this country,, what was the Marriage Law of all
rinteign gauntries, and what is the Marriage tow of
skit country at that pelmet day. Ha would hare 1101
objection to the itstroduetiou of a slam, declaring'
that the potion -Cbntracting marriage with a female
rainurehasild not sadeivoa shilUttg Dna Aaiun. ; but
to a dare giving a third.parson power to seallevoisi
a nssierirerfly solemnized. he would never ussiga
uscourr alio opposed the &lilt
Archbishop of CAIITERSURV denied that
was as sting eentraty4ta the spirit. of Oasis.
*helms:4N 'which, bessiaver,-bewaseithers
to, as to wish to maintain it egaiesilinvisiiik
.louse. His only object in supportintifis
maintain the authority of parents. Marriage was

ian with respect to his Owl rove tien of.
t.e
which it should be celebrated.
REDESDALE contended, also, that ma-.
'as a regulation made by man, and then time,
le it as expedient as possible to thr•ir °scope?...
state of society. Wet it then expedient to dis,
tarriages contracted by minors? There ssai
in the law of Cioo-vrhieft preveeted
eking at and regulating those things vhigh
be injurious to itself, to the morality of the Lite.
ple, or to the patties themselves, who had contiactsi
that marriage. Under all circumstances, he thnup
that much inconvenience would arise from mtia;
marriages, when once solemnized, voidable. lk
Lord ELLENBOROUGH was of opilli,:n, JT4
all the Select Committee had divided on this thekt„
it would not have found. its way into the
was matter of regret and astonishment, that thareek
Reverend Prelate should not have given the elitir
better • consideration; and especially that he shoulib
now wish the House to adopt it; when, last ye at,
cording to the ordinary reports which got 414,,14
their Lordships' proceedings~ he declared. it to*
contrary to morals and religion.
The. Archbishop of CANTER BUlt Y %vat not bigot.,
ted to this clause, but he was determined to oppot
that which was to be proposed instead of it..
Lord ELLENBOROUGH contended that ix%
much easier to contract a clandeStine martiqe by
banns than by heave.
The Bishop of LONDON maintained that then
was nothing in theclause inconsistent with the Chris-
tian religion or morality.
Lord SIDMOUTH, as a Member of the Commit.
tee, agreed in the defence that had heen made for
this clause. It was impious to conceive that such
marriages were made by Goo, which were the tin;
of fraud, forgery, and perjury; and it was only mar.
riages contracted by these means that this Llanseptu.
posed to render null. He was astonished to learn
.much commiseration for utfortunate females by
those who wished to make the %%moan re:,.ain torrite
the wife of convicted felon, if her mat iage was
contracted through fraud, forgery, anti prijor
Lord ELLENBOROUGH explained. Mocha
been a feeble attempt to defend this clause; but mute
to prove that it would nut be complaely nugatory,
and be evaded easily, wherever there was any dispo.
sition to do so.

Lord POWERSCOURT again opposed the ..lance.
Lord STOWELL said, the wholeof our Marriage
Laws had taken care to provide for the strengthen.
ing of the parental authority over the younger branches
of mankind. At least this had beau the case silicsOle
Reformation ; it was a role laid, down by our illus.
thous Reformer Cranmer, and prevaLed in every
Protestant country in Europe, except Scotland, which
adhered to the rule of the ancient religion of the
country. By the present law a marriage was null
and void, however soleronlyar religiously celeirratetf,
unles it was preceded by the legal form of banns of
license. The Committee found there were but foot
modes of going to work, namely—trullity;• a liming
; preventive measures ; fourth
would have been throwing the reins on the necks ofthe
youth of both sexes. Nullity and the last were boak
out of the question. It was desirable that the Mio
riage Laws -of this country should be uniform; and
that there should not be ome for the rich and ano.
they for the poor. He had seen many fathers chose
happiness had been blasted by having sons enteric*
infamous connexions, by which their prospects in life
were utterly destroyed. The natural modesty of the
see, their retirement with their mothers, *spa
young women to fewer snares and temptations that
fell to the lot of young men living at College, or is
business, at a distance from their parents and frieadi
' The Committee then divided—
For the Nullity Clause
Against it - - - - sit
Majority against it - - —6
The other clauses were then agreed to, with mom
verbal amendments, and the House adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMON&

Mr. LINDSAY presented a Petition from the Hoe. Jais
Lindsay, l'roptietor of a small island, lying off Guernsey, miles
that he, the .
Petitioner, Lad a large quantity of granite sten ti
&pose of, which he could sell cheap ; and praying, that tar
attention of the. Loudon Bridge Committee might be distal
to she subject.
Returns of the amount of British Shipping, and its ROO
employed for the last dune years; distinguishing each yeasl
the Import and Hapset Trade of the United Kingdom, mse
dared to be laid before the Howe.
Mr. WALLACE presented the Repoli of the Pon* 'Dab
Cotnnauter.a.Ordered to be rioted.
Mr. T. COURTHRAY gave node% that he nose, tear
revs, Move for haves to Icing In a Bill, to akar, awed. Wm"
mildew the alinkrupa Laws. . vs.
Mr. WILMOT HOILTON presented papas sod mirMille
Correspondence relative to the Island of Cuba, whir seminillr

COUNTY 000111 TS SILL.
Lord ALIIISORPS moved the Order of die Mar
for the House goina into a Committee on the COSSIF
Courts Bill. The Noble Lied observed, dials
moving to fill up the blanks in this Hilt, he d:midis
the limits of the Courts Jurisdiction at W. ilaid
of 151. as he had at first.propose4; not but he was
fully persuaded all the arguments. in favour of thr
Bill would apply as well to 151. as la; bat
would not risk-his Bill by taking too much atoms.
If the machinery of the Bill 'was found to wave, it
would be easy to increase the sum..'
This Bill was dm coauniuecl, the blanks El* :NU
the Report received, amid ordered to be takeniebrio
they consideration on Tuesday belt.
JOIOT TENANCY BILL. •
Mr. DOMINICK BROWNE moved theaaki
the Day for the third reading of theJoinifeseiJ
Mr. H'UTCHINSON.. complained of tin
having been brought forward at, sq fates posoda,
the Session. The object of this Bill was melbas
great change in the situation and Constitutioa of kw
Fanscr; whether that change would baloadelital
otherwise, he couldnot take on himself to Oa: ibis*,
was it necessary he should do so .oa-60"4:0400e 410'r
sion. Rethought his Hon. Friend.sol4d 0,11191011 t
Bill as perfect as possibly Red, ITMert'issoc't
shotight It should be printed and
the dotmtry, and afford' in die
Juries and other budir4-‘as, ycl; abl#RlVEtir
closiernod. o give mitt. -1:"1)$
Lord MILTON and Mr. DANOWEIN
Bill, which -was read a ddriPriintraskbprlig'"l
Astogrbi•taurttur un onto sit
igto
1k .1; NEWIORT akidabilliedsag.
whether he intended, in the course of the Sis#lll9ll
bring under the consideration of the House Chetri;f•

= would supporritOutbeiriAloweaurf to ow* et aco:taos an opportunity '
_.. , eft to m:
first irer • vitiohoseqp. .' I prim • might nos to meet tisfu '4, 01,Cir fkrms in
....
sno-1, .. op.ort - hoped and' . rt their geglohipkwhheid to 40 so, •Sti. • • Lord A
illitalt.
qty's • ... • d illpuse stout give'. *tort conside. hid iscbubjaction that miters *ethos intofeanrier riago was
far; .. 1 to'the*.opiiiikl amendriehle4l went to ihoeld.he punished by picanioty Sees, or erferf 940- foreenadi
aer deprive'fncumbenti 4 their verig_hts; &claims of property; bat' he Could zterersckuslOt t 0 ticolar st;
law.. Lord REDESDALE thought the Qapelry ought the passing of this clause, because it was contrary to solve our
used to be annexed to the Chapel. The paities who were the law d` Goa;. and he also opposed this clause be- nothing i
iblic to be allowed to publish banns in Chapels ought to cause it introduced an anomaly, namely, that the from 100 l
had be residents of the parish in which the Chapel was •eorriages of minors by license were valid, but the might be
margin ads: a sitifinra hr banns invalid. These consi- ale. or to

is ;Os. Nothing could he more ileac dullish' Letti
og of those vror‘ of one Doman iqu. Tbs Li
rivet Legislator .aid a mawought sotto pot *we was
his wik, e , for adultery. Afmr. Album dimity in
its, be mast, that awrisjiikart hied treaded
solemnized according to the laws Of Csrho ands of die Ho
ws of man, and he, therefore, thought a law 'to moist&