Star.
London, England, 1802-03-05 00:00:00

WANTED in a dry healthy Situatinn, within
Fifty nr Sixty Milos of London, and Two or Three
Of a Market Town• to Putchafc or Rent, a faun fondly Houk,
•+ith L few Acres of Land contiguous tlincto. and other
fokabla conveniences.

Lo en cobs deeded to
ucks.

P4II4LentENIARr PROCEEDINGS.

:IIOUSE6fLORDS. THURSDAY, MARCH 4.

• - •
On the Order being moved for the fecond read-
in of Woodcock's Divorce Bill,
Lord AOMILAMD thought it very neceffary to
call their Lordffiips' attention to the prefent Peti-
tion, and particularly fo after the vigilance which
the Houfe had been obliged to exercile for fome
years paR, on the fubjcfl of Divorces. There were
two inftances of Bills fimilar to the prefent having
been before the Houle. One was the Petition of a
Mr. Ellen, in which it appeared that he had entered
into a deed of reparation with his wife, by which
he left her at liberty to difpore of herfelf as the
might think proper. That Bill was very properly
reyeßed by the Houle. The other Bill he alluded
so, was that f-r divorcing a Mr. Twifleton from
his wife : which the House agreed to. It was now
time that the Houfe Ihould come to a fixed and fet-
tled rule on the fubjed,fo as to prevent applications
of this kind from coming forward. It appeaied by
she Bill then on the Table, that the prefect Peti-
tioner had, in the year 1794. figned an inftrument,
by which he feparatedkhimfelf from his wife; that
the after that reparation, committed adultery, for
which he could not maintain an action in a Court
of Jullice for damages; but he came to that Houle
to apply for relief—for what? was it for any injury
he had fugained ? No; becaufe he could not prove
any injury in a Court of Juflice. What tight then
had he to expert any relief from Parliament ? No-
ble Lords might think that in cafes of this natur:
there was no collufion. Apparently. there might
be none; but it was very poffible that a perfect un-
derflanding, and a collufion of the moll artful
kind, might cliff. The only way therefore to get
rid of the difficulty was, not to receive any Bills
for Divorces at all, unlefs the parties brought for-
ward a clear, untainted. and unfufpcded cafe.—
And an ellintial part of fuch a cafe fhould be, that
the parties had received el-mages in a Court of
Law, and had never feparated from their wires.
This was a rubjed which required the Mon ferious
attention of the Houfe. It involved in it nothing
lefs than the exiftence o‘the Conftitution and of
the Country, to fupport which it was neceffary to
prevenwthe public morals from being corrupted.
—We had already teen enough in a neighbouring
country to put us on our guard againft the conta-
gion that might fpread here. Let any man look
to Fiance, and fee what were the fruits of that
law which made marriage a civil contrad, and put
it in the power of parties to be divorced, for fo
trivial a caufe as incompatibility of temper. He
would find that during tle ha year upwards of
700 Divorces a viands istairimeini took place in Pa-
ris and its vicinity. We had already efcaped one
dreadful evil with which we were threatened from
France. Let radiainent take care that an evil,
ultimately as dangerous, Ihould not creep into the
Country. At prefent the Houle could do no more
than flop the facility of obtaining Divorce Bills,
and by that means they might be rendered leli
frequent. The prefent Bill had on the face of it,
without hearing any evidence whatever, enough
to render it inadtniffible. His Lordfhip then con-
cluded with moving, That the Bill be rejeaed."
The LORD CHANCELLOR coincided in every thing
which fell from the Noble Lord, except the Mo-
tion with which he concluded becaufe, as the
Bill Ind gone fo fir, he thought the Houle ought
to hear what the Petitioner had to fay. He confi-
tiered it of thesnmoll importance that in Bills of
this kind, where the Petitioner failed in bringing
forward the neceffary fads to conftitute a fair bows
ids cafe, the Petition ought not to be received at
all. If it was effential to the difienee of a tingle
family that morality and good order fhould be ob-
ferved by the Members of it, how much more ne-
ceffary was it to preferve the morals of the nation
at large, which conflituted one great family ? He
was clearly of opinion that aria& of reparation be-
tween two parties conftitutcd a good around for
rejediag the petition °Nile huroand. Hc did not
fee any jug reafons why the& voluntary repera-
Cons Humid be permitted. It was but very lately
that a monftrous novelty was attempted to be in-
troduced into Westminster Hall—that a woman
who had parted from her hufband in cnnfcquence
of a deed of feparation, was to be confidered asfisi
jgris, and could contract debts for which her huf-
band Ihould not be anfy:erable. It was adonifhing
to conceive to what an extent this pmaice of fepa-
ration had been carried. It had proceeded from
the h;gher to the lower orders nf the people. He
recollected a circumflancc which-came out in a
legal proceeding that took place ‘ia the Court
wacre h: had lalt prefided. It, was. that of one
of the lowett orders of livery.iervants, between
nitro; and his wife a deed 'of reparation had
11,:en entered into; and it was ftipulated between
them, that he Ihould give her a• certain allow-
ance i,f his wages, and that he ghould en-
en:ale that allowance in proportion as he Ihould
ritifcd to higher fitnatians in the family where
lie (rived. His Lordfnip Paid, he merely men-
t"t.itd this fad, to thew how far the hufitiefs of
separations had proceeded, and point out the ne-
cel'ity of, putting a flop to them. He concluded
with moving, That Counfel be called in."
Mr. ADAM then appeared at the Bar; and laid,
that Mr. Woodcock, the Gentleman in whole be-
half he then came forward, had, at the age of 19,
married a young Lady named Croihy, who was
alto under age, but the marriage took place with
the content eft 'their friends. Incapable from his
*youth and ineitperience of judging of the impro-
priety of fuch a choice, the conduet of the Lady
(non gave him caufe to repent of what he had
dune. She loon entered into habits of extrava-
gance that were totally different from his notions
of dorneflie happinefs ; and it was folely in conk-
tinence of her condo& that he was obliged to exe-
cute a deed of feparationirom her- -
The Duke of Noarul.l role to a& what was the

realbn affigned in the deed for the reparation? Si.J
it appearing that it WAS "fur various unhappy disa-
greements," Ste.
The Loan Cuaiseettox afhed Mr. Adam if he
had witneffes to prove thofe fasts to which he al-
luded, with regard to the cattle of the feparation ?
Mr. ADAM faid he had not any it-articular wit-
neffes for that purpofe; hut their Lordfhips might
collect the fads generally from thole witneffes who
were to prove the other parts of the care.
The Duke of NORFOLK then rofc and Iltid it was
not for their Lordlhips to draw forth loch evi-
dence ; it was for the Petitioner to produce it ;
'and he would move that the Bill be immediately
rejeded.
Lord Atvas LIT exprefTed nearly the ftme fen-
timents with the Lord Chancellor, but wiflied the
Bill to be put off till Monday next.
The Duke of CLaittatce faid, he underftood
there was evidence fufficient to prove the cattle of
the feparation.
Mr. ADAM was then called to the bar, and be-
ing quetlioned as to that fad, faid, he underftood
from the Solicitor that fuch evidence was at hand,
and could prove the conduit of the Lady to be
fuch as to render a feparation on the part of the
hufband neeeffary.
After fome further converfation between the
Lord Chancellor, Lord Alvanley, and Lord Anck-
I land, the Bill was rejected.—Adjourned.