Star.
London, England, 1822-08-27 00:00:00

THS NEW MARRIAGE .Ad 4.

We ray before sour Readers the fninwinglegalepinfon,by De:
Pniumasen, upon eertein queries submitted to that Centimes,
cossetted with the above notable piece le;istation:
" t will endeavesr to answer the. several gentians In the or-
der Is which they err pet, and to prevent any rnisappreknasian.
I will prefix to each answer my understanding of thv purport g
the 'needs&
" First, Whether, in ewes where the publication of /minas/
' been completed before the Ist If September, but the marriage •
hes not taken place, the banns must be republished
gi To this I should reply, that I see nu necessity for any nigh
repuldleadon. Tho new law, as far as it affects nturiages br
banns, hes no effect or operation whatsoever till the Ist of Sep.
tember; is the case pa, therefore, antecedently to **ashy, dm
publication will have been completed according to the strictest
provisions of the existing law; and on proof of their having been
so completed, the Clergyman, I apprehend, will be fully justified
in the performance of she ceremony. Consequently. am
opinion, that a Clergyman flay securely proceed to the solemn':
titian of matrimony in ail cases where the banns have been pub.:
Ushed in exact confartislry with the law actually in force, en the
three Sundays preceding the ist of September.
Secondly, Whether, in eases where the publication of basis
has taken place en two Sundays previous to the Ist of Septets=
her, the Clergythau may proems] with the banns, and couclude
them on that day ?
" Perhaps there is rather ineredideelty in enswering this, then
the former question, because from the absence of any preempts.
vision as to this point in the Statute. the Clergyman, to a email*
extent, is called upon tonaercifse more discretion in one instance
than in the other ; bat in my judgment he will exercise thetas-
cresion. *sad sandly, if he gives effect and validity to all the
publications of banns which have taken place in conformity with
the law as it mainlined on the three several Sundays on which
they were made. Every such publication must, I think, be con-
sidered as legally made.' The two first publications, therefor;
would here 1411110 good; but the third, not being made as the
day on which the operation of the new Act commences, mini
not be proceeded upon _till the requisites enjoined by that Am
shall have bees eompliefl with.
a I am aware that, technically speaking, all the requisites can-
not, by such a course of proceeding, hive been observed. The
names, for Instance, cannot have been affixed for three Sundays
to the March door; but in cases of this description, in acting
upon the law, we must put a rational construction on it, and ap-
proach, as nearly as we can, to an adequate execution of it.
" It may be.satisfactory, also, both with respect to this an
the preceding question, to observe, that the validity of any nr.r.
ridge solemnized under such circumstances, can never be int-
pugned, or called in question, on either of these grounds, ihas-
much as the 19th Section precludes all inquiry as to the suffici-
ency of these forms after the actual solemnization of any marri m;e.
" Thirdly, Whether, as the Living is within a peculiar juris-
diction, marriages can still he performed there by license?
" I certainly understand the 14th Section of the New Act, by
restricting the power of granting liceu,es to and
Bishops, virtually to have excluded peceliar and exempt jurisdic-
tions from issuing such instruments ; but the Act goes no farther;
therefore, I presume that, in your Parish, as in atl utlizr l'arishes
situated within a peculiar jurisdiction, there can be nu doubt but
that a license from the Archbishop of Canterbury m
u,; .....spimse
with the publication of banns. In the meantime it is extremely
advisable that any persons who, since the passing of the Act, may
have been married by a license, from the peculiar jurisdiction,
should forthwith be re-mart ied, either by banns or under a license
granted by competent authority.
" Finally, in giving this opinion, I beg to explain that I know
nothing (as seems to be insinuated in the statement of the case)
of the intention of the framers of any one of the provisiori to
which my attention has been directed. The interpretatiou I Lave
put upon them arises solely from the best consideration 1 have
been able to apply to the Statute, and to the p-neral bearing ci
the blarriage.Law of this part of the United

"JOSEPH PH11;
" Doctors' Commons, August 12, 1822."

_AMIZE.