The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-07-13 00:00:00

STAIIESIVIA.

were made beta eon the years he had gamed by the
parties merely ruing before a Justice of the Peace to els-
tete his sanction to their anion. Those marriages were
esologlitedly null and void, but the Legislature, by • re-
trospective law bail decided or making them good. An-
other case in point was the law respecting the marriages
of Priests. These by the COlOlOOO law had been null sod
void, their offspring illegitimate, and property which
otherwise would have devolved to them they were in-
capable of enjoyisg. A law, however, passe to make
these marriages valid, and mbeequeetly soother to re-
move all reproach from the offspring of tech marriages,
and to reptile them to inherit property. These cases the
Honourable and Learned Beatlenslo opposite said were
different from those affected by the Marriage Act.
When he called for precedents, the Learned Gentleman
was not content with similarity, but looked for identity.
It was, however, the principle of the laws to which he
bad referred that they were to look to, and that wu suf-
ficient to justify the present Bill so farm precedent went.
The Bill now before the Hens* got rid of the perpetual
nullity of the Marriage Act, which wu at variance with
all the analogies of our law, which precludes even time
from giving security to property, and indicted evils
which might go on from generation to generation, con-
tinually increasing in geometrical proportion. It had
been proposed to the Rouse of Lords to render mar-
riages valid and their issue legitimate, but to take away
the right of such parties to inherit property. The
woman wu to he a wife in all other rights, but she was
not to claim a dowry t and berchildren, who were to be
legitimatised by birth, were to have DO claim epos the
property of their parents. This was the first time that
a distinction Itetween right and property bad ever been
recognised in English law. Yet this bad been thought
f. +d enough to be proposed to the consume seem of '
their Lordships. By passing the Bill as it sow stood,
the Peers of England raised the high character which
they had already enjoyed in the , pinion of the peo,ple,
as the constant protectors of the public good. The
Right Honourable and Learned Oentlenian concluded by
declaring his aneions hops for the some's' of the llill
amid the loudest and long continued cheering.
Mr. HUDSON GURNEY objected to the retrospec-
tive clause, but thought the general operation of tbe Bill
entitled it to the support of the Houses

Mr. WETHERELL opposed the Bill. He did not be-
lieve that the retrospective clause would have an exten-
sive operation, but it could produce nothing but mis-
chief and Injustice. They hail beard of the practice of
canvassing for votes upon private Bills, and that was
bad tomb ; but until the present measure was pro-
posed, be never heard of canvassing for vortis upon •
question affecting the most important interests of the
public. It was notorious, too, that this cue had an as-
pect to a particnlar case now adder litigation.—(Hear,
bear.)—What he would ask, was the old law, which this
Sill was intended to replace? Was it not franked by
Lord Hardwkke, one of the greatest men that ever this
emintry produced ? And was not the present Bill op-
peed by the Lord Chancellor of the Tear 1822. whose
beat learning, and knowledge, and high acquirements,
rendered him at least equal if not superior, to his great
nor in that office? lie admitted that the feel.,
were exposed to deep injury by the op.- i
ratios of the existing law, and his mind required no
moralising. boannisintiofloence, to make him regret
it as deeply as any one; bat such regret would not la;
dime ions to throw aside the principles of established*
Iww. sad tp disregard the constitutional rights of pro-
perty. lie could also meet the suppoiters of this Bill
up die score of feelings; for although some parties
id be relieved from the occurrence of miseries by'
sration, vet it would impose on others a degree of
ip not less intolerable. He also objected OD
such a power in the handset the Crown. as Milt
'ell declaring whether propertyshoeld or should not do.
wend to the ebiWren of parties whose marriage Wil-
kes irregular and contrary to law. What a amintrear
power it would be to entrust in the hands of any 'glair
ten. He did not think that at present it goad be
abused; bet bow liable would it be to abase an* pa-
dealer circumstances. It was so less a power than that
of declaring whether tiseoffspring of marriages should
be legitimate or spurious. And might there not be
cases of el exactly similar character, in which policy
might dictate different courses, while justice demanded
an equality of treatment. Thus, with the same rights,
one party might ho admitted to the enjoyment of pro-
perty, while the other was excluded from it. The Hon.
and Learned Gentleman argued powerfully against the
Bill, awl conjured the House not to pass it with the
indecent haste which was now proposed. By a full et-
amination of the clauses, and the necessary amendments
to them being made, he wilds; become reconciled to the
principle of the measure. But without ample discussion
he thought it impossible that the House should agreed
to a Bill containing so many new enactments upon which
they had *ever held deliberation.
Dr. PHILLIMORE denid that the Bill was intended
to apply to a particular case. A Bill was introduced to
the house in the year 1817, of a much more retrospective
nature than the present; and the case alluded to was not
then in existence.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL spoke in opposition to
the Bill. He confessed that it appeared to him inex-
plicable. It destroyed the Act introduced by Lord Hard-
wicke, bat it left nothing to supply its place. He pro-
ceeded to point out the hardships which the Bill would
entail upon parties affected by its operation, and parti-
cularly, deprecated the placing at the disposal of the
Crown the extraordinary power ofconnuating property
for the commission of an illegal act with regard to mar-
riage. The question for the house to consider was not,
as that eloquence of his Right lion. Friend bad endea-
voured to persuade them, whether a nullity of marriage
should be allowed which would produce all the misery
and distress which he had described, hut whether they
should pass a Bill changing the whole principles of oar
marriage laws with such haste as to defy all deliberation,
and preclude all discussion. He then proceeded to ex-
amine the prospective clauses and pointed out the ano-
malies and blunders which they contained. One pro-
vided, that if one of the parties were of age, should
swear the other was 2/. Then again it was to he ne
cessary that a copy of the register of the births of the
parties should he produced to the Clergyman. Now it
was very well known, that in many cases persons were
net registered for mooths, or years after being born.—
This would be the case where children were born while
their parents were out of the country. So that when
the register was produced, the person could not marry,
although in fact he might be more titan of age. Ano-
ther provision was, that the houses of the parties should
he affixed to the church doors, and in some conspicuous
part within the church.—(A hingh.)—The credit of
this, however, did not belong to their Lordships. it was
in the clause of his Hon. and Learned Friend. With
regard to the retrospective operation of the Bill, he had
heard with surprise from his Right Hon. Friend the At.
torney-Geeeral for Ireland, that retrospective operation
was an ordinary principle of legislation. Now he con-
fessed that this was contrary to all that ever he bad
heard or read.
Mr. PLUNKET observed that he did not say se.—
What be said was, that in cases affecting property, re-
trospective enactment was as ordinary principle of le-
gislation.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL said that sat+ enact-
ments only applied to the particular cues, but this pro-
position was :or recyjnising the principle is s general
and public law. The 'masers of Lord Iludwicke had
existed from 1754 down to the present day without any
alteration in its principle, and DON it was proposed ail
at arm without &liberation and without &mission. ii,

change and destroy its principle altogether. If distill
should pass.. say rang man of family might mama
prostitute, and parents bave se remedy. Mach 41
been said respecting the punishment of children for o,
faults, of their parents. Unfortunately • violation *
disregard of the law had that offset, bat it was the ,
of Eaglisb law to make children gaffer for the .sett
of their father. The law of attainder had precisely skit
effect. With respect to property, the House could es,*
in its justice deprive persoes of their vested rights. 7%,
retrospective douse would unhinge the law of 1754. it
all the statutes existing rights had been strictly s**
*aimed. He called nn the house to pause before sk*
passed this Bill. They ought t• consider in what NA
their property would stand. This Bill bed hose sad
tered io the Hoes* of Lords, that it comedown as astir
measure, to which, he contended, the Hoses of Comma,
seght to withhold their consent.
Sir J. MACKINTOSH begged to be Hidalgo' soo
the attention of the House for a short lime. It was is
cumbeat on him to make a few observations in aim
to the speech of his Right Hon. Prised. who '
errs*
had spoken with moral courage, which did him Ify
greatest honour. He agreed with his Hon. and Lemesi
Iffriend, the Member for Oxford, is deprecating my
lemmas. with Members of Parliament. to support thole
My other measure. He could at least say, no p.m
had offered an insult by presuming to canvass bk.
Plea years ago, how before be beard of the case whisk
bad been so trequeatly alluded to, be felt the injostiss
of the Marriage Act. Whets be saw It held a teatime!
to overturn the peace of families, by leading dear Ml
titles to destroy wealth, honour, ancf dignity, it oasis
possible to say such a law ought to exist. !ferret/ply
against the mode which had been adopted in the di
lion on this 'abject. They were to consider the die
of the Marriage Act, and think of reformatioo.
Honourable Members bad ohjeeted to mosey alteratiso
in the Marriage Act by the House of Lords. 'Rs
Marriage Act originated in the House of Lords, ant
their decision ought to satisfy tha House of Coatroom
Decanse the Houle of Peers were eertsialy ietersalei
in liking care that persons should sot marry imps
petty with Noble Families. The House of Lords ha
made the Bill better that it was when is was sent ail.
It was one of the most important natters of legidi
tioo that could possibly interest the peace and .1.
es ne of the people of this country. They but hear el
blunders in the Bill with respect to satires on chard
doors, but be was convinced there was not a Court.,
Law that would sot pat a construes:on on that part et
the-Bill, deciding that a descriptios of the reside/seed
the parties was to be made public. He stood up for the
interest of children, sad the smirk" of property. nen
were few families in which objections might not sake
marriages illegal, and children illegitimate, and that
very circumstance proved the necessity for this Bill.-
'rho only way to pot at end to diets doubts in marriages
was to pass the Bill, sod give quiet possession. TU
was a Bill which sleeted the whole cosntoneity. Eeuy
child born, and unborn. Expedience required nons.
pection. The peace of families must be set at rest.-
They were not to look at law authorities alone on this
subject. if they were to inquire what the law oughts
be, they were to connect public feeling, and not prefer
sloes' opinions. He would oppose legal legielatom to
legal petty fogging, and the liability of lawyers. The
question was, what the measure was, in legal policy.
not what it was with respect to legal opinions. The
law as it stood made a divorce between patrimony and
matrimony. Retrospection was the verb essence of the
Bill, and If they threw the retrospective clause away
they might giveup the Bill. Oa. of the greatest ewe
menial towns in this kingdom foiesed part of the pm.
perry of the funnily which had bees -named in debate
aid melees the retrospective clause was retained est sae
of
the holders of proretty ander that family would he..
a secure title. The Hon. tient. concluded by.sayiselso
considered both the prospective and retrespectwoolaille
founded la justice.
The Marquess of LONDORDERRY eemeested go
wally ma the defects, of she Marriage Aet, sod suppsea
ed the Bill in its amended form. He thought the sue
Hoer of Parliament bad done jestice to the stated pee.
Bible extent, without disturbing the rights of pr
cluck
He felt that this was a most delicate pnaciple of le
don: but there were numerous cases Is guide
course, and various authorities to sanitise the prieeleb
of a retrospective effect in a measure of this naterSe-
Considering the extremely vicious principle of the Ad
of 1753, he felt himself called epos. after the fullest
consideration of its merits, to vote for the Bill as it new
stood.
Mr. CANNING followed on the same side, and as
▪ the House, that in giving his vote on the person
question be was not actuated, either directly or iodi-
rectly, by any particular case. He felt, however, that
unless some greets' measure was adopted, the Hesse
was liable to be perpetually involved in cases of particu-
lar and specific legislation. When be saw no improve-
ment would be made by great characters is the other
House, and when he saw that every improvement wield
be opposed there, unless it originated is simian var.
ter.-(Hear, hear.)-He welcomed the MI with the
bungling alterations made in it, and thanked Provi-
dence for sending this Bill bask, smelt as It sae, With
this %codified and mitigated approbation, be voted for
the Bill.
The House then divided oa the gisestioa for agreeing
to the Lords' Amendments-Ayes, 12E-Nees, 1111-Mo
jority, II!. •
On oar rotors to the galleryore found tie SPEAKER
putting to the vote the clauses seriatim., to which tie
House agreed.
On the clause A., which went to validate marriages,
suits respecting the validity of which had been already
instituted,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL proposed on amend-
ment, to the effect of excepting each marriages from the
operation of the Bill.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw for a division, but
we could not leant the numbers. During our exclusion
from the gallery, we understood that all the cl were
agreed tooled the Bill passed.
The other orders of the day being dispoft,d of, the
house, at • Quarter to Three o'clock.-Adjoerned to
Monday.

Mutant, and Co. sold the Two lint 20,0001. Frites
in the last Lottery Contract. Lottery begins Nest
!Wide, whoa T•n Capitals are sore to be draws sad
may be gained at a trifling risk, as every purchaser may
Faintish's Ticket or Sh.ire after taking thaehattee of the
first day at a small redu.•tion from the price he gave, vit.
only 11. Ifis. on a whole Tirkrt, and fonr shilrtngs on *
Sixteenth, other Shares in proportion (if brought ►ack
before 2tith ly). IV her.' i•iintaina tet WOW. 2et
20.0001. is Se. tee. No• 'no .ilanks to a prise.—
Hasa►daad Office% V 3. Royal Exchange-gate; 26,
Cornbill, and 1:4. Oxford-street.

DIED.
Ow Thursday Inst. at the A ttorney-Geoerd's, Whiashall-
place. London, Mariaaim Eli:abode, Rif* of Monett
Langton, Erg.
Oa Saturday last. at his house, Newiagtooldsee, Mr.
jta 811:Lits &It ii.nualtrietadt,Saii St. Denis, *obis way to Bodope,
in the MY par of his age, Thomas Foster. Esti., of
Ella Estate, Jamaica, and formerly of the °rota, Huck-

London : Edited, Printed. and Published at the Mee of
66 Tula livavesuss" and 6' The Centesivotten" (Sandal
Paper. No. V 97, Strand, by R. WARDELL, L
whoa all eOnnunications, Orden, t.. are reloaded te
Yes addressed.