New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-12-25

Our readers are aware that for many years past
an agitation AID . warm contfo7er'y bas been 60
ing on in England, on the question Of the marriage
By widower with the sister Of bis deceased wife.
Such marriages, though considered lawful aud
proper in al or most other Protestant countries
are By the ecclesiastical canons OF England reck'
oned to be within the prohibited degrees. This,
however, down to the year 1885, did pot make
them void, but only voidable BY proceedings insti-
tuted for that purpose during the life Of both par
ties, in the EcclesiasscAl Court. II no such pro-
ceedings were instituted the marriage was valid
and the children legitimate. After the death of
either party to the marriage, these proceedings
could no longer he set on foot nor could the legti
macy Of the children Of the marriage be called IN
question. TIE only effect therefore, Of the law,
was not to prevent such marriages, which took
place in England about as frequently as IN the
countries where they are lawful, but to put it in
tie power of the husband if at any time he should
choose to do 30, to .repudiate bic wife and to
bsitardizs his children. To remedy this double
evil Of marriages prohibitedby the Church yet valid
at the choice Of the parties, or vodabe when found
burden, an act Of Parliament was passed in 1855,
which declared that all such marriages already con-
tracted should be valid ard binding, but that al
future marriages Of the sort should be, not vodable
merely, but absolutely void.
So far a. related to the putting stop TO such
marriages. this lew had very little effect The hsb-
its and IDEAS of country are not to be changed BY
act of Parliament Though the law had pronounced
such marriages void they continued to be contracted
inst a. before efforts in tho meanwhile being con-
stantly made to procure for them the sanction Of
law, for which purpose society was Termed, which
is stl in operation. In many cases the attempt
was made to give to these marriages legal and bind
rs character by celebrating them abroad in countries
where such marriages were legal, on the sane prin-
eiple by which fight to Gretna Green used to be
svsed otto evade the restrictions Of the Engshmar-
rsge act In fact, this method fevsdng thelsw has
been constantly kept before the public BY the adver-
Elements and publications Of the English society for
procuring the abolition of this restriction.
1t has been held, however, in the recent case OF
Brook vs. Brock, in the Court of Equity, that
under the statute of 1885 all such marriages be-
tween English subjects are just as void when cole
brsted abroad a. when celebrated at home. In
answer to the cases cited going to show that BY tho
law of nations the validity Of marriage depends on
the law of the country where it is celebrated, the
Court denied that any case could be found in which
validity is given, on the strength Of foreign laws, to
any marriage deemed contrary to Gods law and
Holy Scripture" a. is the marriage of the sister
of deceased wife by the English Prayer.Book and
the Act of 1885. Judge Story, in his Conflict OF
Laws suggests that refusal to recognize marriage
abroad on the ground that il is incestuous could
only extend to cases such a. by the general consent
of all Christendom are deemed such. But the
Court decline to recognize this distinction, at least
in the case Of English subjects who 60 abroad for
tie very puIpose-as tho fact in tho case under
confederation contracting marriage which the
English law forbids on grounds Of morality and
relgios.
The general principle q this decision would seem
to be reasonable enough but its practical operation
must be rather hard in setting aside many marriages
in good faith and under the idea Of their
10 gality, and especially in bastardizng the issue Of
such marriages, and thus stripping them, as in this
very case, of inheitanees designed for them by
their parents, and to which they supposed them
selves entitled.