Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1863-11-10

dde some sixty or seventy dollars TOR lncldentals
The vote on the question Of reconsideration
was l0S to A..
The question then come upon eoncurring in the
Senate resolution, and the House refused to con.
cur.
Mr. Haskell, Of WeathersfeId, moved that q Sc
ect committee Of seven be appointed to examine
and report upon tie clam Of Judge Bennett.
Mr.. Fisk Of Mortified sugge sted that the com
mltee should be instructed to report the facts in
the case and with this modification the motion
was agreed to.
THIRD READING or BILLS
An aetl incorporate the Newport Hotel Com.
pany passed.
An act epeaiag certain Sections Of Chapter
90 Of General Statutes relating to marriage.
Mr.. Skinner Of Barton moved to dismiss the
bill, and spoke briefly in support Of this motion,
Mr. Smith Of liardwek opposed the notion
aud slated that in OF er Statcs It was not required
10 give public notice VI intention Of marriage, aud
there @4s no good reason tor requiring such notice
to be given 10 this State. Inc bill provided and
very properly for repeating sections that required
such nouce TO be gNea
SIR. Penil OF Berlin thought be saw some diff
hcuiues in the uul which be set forth at length,
lul expressed the hcpe that the bill would not
Fa,s.
ar, Deaue was 10 favor Of the passage Of the
bill The contract Of marriage was Of impor-
t4uce only 10 ,ue parties, at least until marriage
had been contaminated. There was no good
reason iar requiring suc1 contract to be made
public, While 1t was contract merely.
Mr. IlncNiey q Chelsea, Vas in favor Of dis.
I.. H.. Il D. Il l4
more for the Interests Of be State " allow the
staluts to remain as ID is. 1t was Gel forth IN
ye lin wiCu had been presented TO he lloust,
ihit seua4Uye people were annoyed by having to
give notice o. intention Of marriage. lie could
see no reason ior people beng ashamed o. the
fact Jhey are intend.nd to get married. An IN
s.l.ul Re, rg.laIng Is ths DID,, in Heaven, was
not lAlug T. be ashamed Of. 1t Was said that
some persons would leave the state to avoid the
necessity Of giving notice. II that was the case,
let such people 20, and the longer they staid the
better. lhe fact that dollar fee was carried
out Of the State, was an argument th might ef-
feet some minds, but not his
Nj, DOIph, Of Warren, thought people went
out Of the State to marry, not because they were
ashamed, but because the matter Of marriage was
Was habit Of many teope to inquire into other
peoples business and be thought the law should
not help them.
Mr. Bruce Of Pomiret had been married since
the law under consideration came into operation.
lie found the law very annoying, and was tempt
ed 10 disregard it, lie favored the bill under
consideration.
Mr. McALster Of MiddIesex spoke against
Gismhsiug the bill, and gave bis reasons Tor deSr.
irg lbs passage.
Mr. Abbott of Windsor spoke at sons length
in support Of the bill and presented very iorcIoiy
the reasons for its passage
Mr. Perrin of Berlin favored dlsmIssing the bill
Mr. Miller Of Williston replied to objections
urged against the bill Giving no.ice after parties
had made up their minds to get married did no
good. II the contract was then broken off the
resul, was always disastrous. If totice must be
given, it should be before The arrangement bad
been finally made BY the parties themselves Then
it might be broken up, but not well afterwards.
NJ Skinner OF Barton believed the institution
Of mirage should be carefully guarded. A
daughter might contract an unsuitable marriage
The parent was held accountable if in consequence
OF such marriage bis daughter WAS brought to
want ltwas then his duty to support her. Now
il was unjust that parent should have no notice
of intention Of marriage when SO much RESPONSE
bility rested upon him in relation to the character
and result Of such marriage lie should at least
have such notice as would enable him to make Ell
forts to prevent such marriage from being oonsum'
mated.
Mr. Wheeler OF South Hero thought it only an
annoyance to require notice Of intention OF mar
rage to be given. The old law requiring it bad
become dead letter. During the twenty.three
years that he had been recognized as minister
OF the Gospel he had been applied to but twice to
read public notices OF marriage, Both OF these
cases by the way had proved most miserable match
es In one case the marriage resulted IN family
of beggars and in the other case the man had been
sen 10 State Prison.
Mr.. Houston Of Victory favored dismissiug the
bill.
On the question Of dsmissing the bill Mr. Skin
ner of Barton called for the yeas and nays, yeas 81
nays 81, and the House refused to dismiss the bill.
The bill Was then passed. ADJ.
NF..,. NJ. 4