On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    604, ' |H,E L|A I), | E. [No, 3ff7,,SA,y...

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    [ *• ., ' : Mperial Parliament.. ¦ • • ¦...

    that , if Maynooth were destroyed , theero ^ tan * f ! burch in Ireland mustbe destroyed also ] that to ^ rescind the ^ S » afrw ^ iid be unfair toward s JSoman Catholics j that ti > e « hXtiateof . our religions endowment * in Ireland m an anomalr V and that it is extremely injudicious to « Se ^ gryfeelin « s between Catholics and Protestants —Mr Bowtbb also resisted the measure , and denied the assertion of Mr . Drummond that Liguori ip impli-^¦ cftlv believei * by every Roman Catholic . — Captain { -TSafiLswv referring to a former debate , asked Sir Willtam Verner whether he still adhered to the statement he made , that Bibles had been burtted in the diocese of Dr . 1 M'Hale ,-when it was notorious that Dr . M'Hale got ' Bibles printed in Dublin . —Sir Wiuiam Vbrner said f fcnat he had not made any such statement .

    ¦ MrL S * 6 bHBB replied , and the House divided , when there appeared —For Dhe amendment , 168 ; against , 174 . -The question " that the bill be read a second time , " was tlien put" from the chairj but opposed by Mr . Bowteb , who moved the : adjournment of the debate . —Mr . Swk * HRR remonstrated against this procrastination . —Mr . BW U ** Hebbbot , however , insisted upon the propriety of Tturther discussion , and protracted his remarks on this point until a quarter to six o ' clock , when the Speaker declared'the debate adjourned . " " The orders of the day having been disposed of , the House rose at ten minutes to six o ' clock . . . . \ . ; Thursday , June 26 ££ . .: •¦ :: ¦ GRAND JTXBX BILL .

    : ; In-fche HotSH or Lords , Lord Campbell , in moving tfee second Teadlag of this bill , explained that its object r-w « s ? t & permit witnesses before the grand j ury being sworn in the grand jury-room by the foreman j instead of by the , crie * in court as ; at present . —Lord Poktman with-< lrew ** be amendmentof which he had given notice . — , The Lord Chancellor expressed his approval of the vbjlL which he considered would be of unmixed advantage . —After a conversational discussion , in which a general approval of the bill was intimated , it was read a second time .

    DIVORCE ADD MATRIMONIAL CAUSES . Lord Lymdhovbst , in bringing up the report of this bill , stated that the great object the committee had in . : view was to obtain a separate tribunal for the decision of matrimonial causes , and they came to the conclusion that it ought to consist of the Lord Chancellor , the .: three Chief Justices of the courts of common law , and ^ , the Dean of the Arches ..- With such a tribunal , from ... which , in cases-a vincvlo matrimonii , there would be an ,, ' . appeals to > : the Hou » e . ofLords , ; ia matters of law , ' but c . wo ^ iflj-ifactj he . thought , their Lordships and the f public , ought to be satisfied . The Dean of the Arches . would ; have the power to sit alone and decide K- oaves a , pietwd et thoro , but an appeal would lie from , „ him , to-. the larger court . As to the alterations law the had

    ^ mJb & Lexl & tivg committee unanimously de-. joined ! tfeat . -wshetea / wife was separated from her husband a mentd et thoro , in consequence of his misconduct , . . ... ¦ whatever property was acquired by her subsequent to . _ nthe separation should be held for her own separate use . v jT , hey also . proposed to give her the right of sueing in ) ; , ^ eElp'wn , naine for any wrong done to her while living rsapart from her husband , which was denied to her at / . present ,, unless with the husband ' s consent . He ( Lord , Lyndhurst ) bad proposed to the committee to abolish the practice of bringing actions to recover damages in , , / cases ,, of adultery—a practice which he conceived is of ¦ the' most ' scandalous nature , and which excites the

    , wonder and disgust of continental nations , where no vguch thing is known , and which , moreover , is extremely , unfair to the woman , as she cannot be a party to the action , or in any way defend herself ; but the committee decidedjagainst him . They recommended , however , that tfce . wife should have a right of divorce in cases of adul-! . iiirjr with . cruelty , incestuous adultery , and bigamy . He M , however , adhered to the opinion that it is alike . consistent "With law , Scripture , and reason that , with respect to adultery , the wife should be put upon the same footing as the husband in all respects ; and ho meant to submit a motion at a subsequent stage of the bill with the view to elicit their Lordships' opinion on . # W , » ubject .

    . The Marquis of . Lansdowne supported the bill , and Observed that he had long regarded the position of , ^ on > en in i this country as equivalent to that which ' might be expected , to prevail . in the least civilised and mo » t '; barbarous nations of the earth . Nothing could exceed- the hardship of the existing law which enables a , worthless and . profligate husband . to step in from time to titnej and deprive bis wife , from whom ho is separated , of h , er means of . subsistence . He would mention a case , ia point . .. Toe ) wife of a shoemaker -was doeorted by her

    . muband ,, who , at the end of seven years , returned , : fji ^ BA ^ alt , tftp promts of the woman ' s , industry , ; waited Y pon ' ui ^ cuftwiners , and , collecting the bills which were 4 ue tft . b ^ Kj ^ ppropriated' the proceeds to his own benefit . . ^''^ n ans ^ r ^ o , ( Cases such , aa those , " continued his Lordi »]? K " , WW tftl ^ byisoine Jearn , ed , writex ' Oh , that oM ^^ PPP *!" ? 1 jWl ^ f JMV ^ coftBtry , bpf ; jthero are remedies . ffikfrW ? QiW ^ frM equity / , A court , of equity ! Why , my Lords , to ,, Mnd ^ ie , wife of a humble . phpeiiffmMP / tf > f : *>» Wy » l ? PPlf * f » 9 r . | p | w k v ;\ er , r « ppody , in a n-y ^ mFmtL fiisMPtt >*«<>&&» # < % 9 t > . tkK ^ wri & tto »!>

    Appfiaxa ^ to ^ jofl ^ touJMi ^ JiBith Rr . m ore nnr . leas , than-, * mockery—a mo « ikery , to which I hope in . future < no one wiU ever hav ; e oqpasio ^ a to have recourse . ( Hear , juur . y I hope that this , important subject . will not be allowet to drop -without /^ me ^ remedy , being applied , and I earnestly , trust , abqve all , '¦ that means will be found to put an end to ; actipns ,, for criminal conversation . ( Hear , hear . } . I have already said that the disgusting details which are dragged to light in . the , course of such actions act injuriously upon public morals . Tour . Lordships know how many of these cases have been tried in our own time , and the deplorable consequences to . which they have sometimes led . It is related of Charles" II ., who was induced to attend one of the earliest of them every day while it lasted , that he said he found it quite as entertaining as a play . I humbly think that an action for criminal conversation is not an edifying subject of amusement either for sovereign or for people . "

    The Lord Chancellor said , the majority of the committee were of opinion that it would not be safe to abolish the action for criminal conversation , as in that case a rich man might inflict a gr ievous injury on a poor man . By the present bill , a divorce might be obtained without previously such an action ; and he thought it would now be but seldom resorted to . For himself , he had no objection to the relief in cases . of adultery being J * eciprocal ; but the public draws a distinction between the degree of guilt on the . part of the

    husband and that on the part of the wife , and would not be likely to approve of giving an equal right of redress . —Lord Campbell eulogized the bill , but hoped that facilities would not be multiplied for obtaining divorce . Adultery on the part of the husband might be condoned ; that on the part of the . wife never , as it dissolves the marriage tie . —Lord St . Germans supported the bill , but suggested an amendment , that no action be brought for criminal' conversation unless the court to be constituted by the bill pronounce a divorce a vinculo

    matrimonn . The Bishop of Oxford thought that those provisions in the bill which had reference to cases of cruelty perpetrated on married women would be productive of great good ; but , though there were objections to the action for criminal conversation , he could not ; consent to facilitating the dissolution of marriage a vinculo , even for adultery . It had long been a disputed point among divines whether such was allowable by the law of God . St . Augustine , after weighing the evidence with great nicety , declined to decide ; but he ( the Bishop of Oxford ) had no doubt of its lawfulness . Still , he thought , if the facilities were increased , " it would be impossible to prevent the spread of that master evil in such cases ,

    collusion , which would by degrees sap tne morality of married life among the lower classes . On the other hand , if the law were not brought within the reach of the lowest class of society , the greatest dissatisfaction would prevail . Moreover , it would necessarily follow that man and woman must be placed on the same footing . Among the lower classes , who give no indication of any wish for relaxation of the law , it is . perfectly well known that a legal divorce is an impossibility , and to that circumstance might be traced that sacredness of the , marriage tie among the lower orders of the English people which is no remarkable . IVJCany unhappy terminations of marriages in high life might have Tbeen Avoided if it were as impossible in that class to obtain dissolution of the tie as it is at present among the poorer people of this land . "

    The Duke of Arqyll pointed out the inconsistency of the Bishop of Oxford in admitting that divorce for adultery is permitted by the law of God , yet desiring to render that permission nugatory . —Lord Redesdale was disinclined to give greater facilities for divorce , and ho felt bound to oppose the bill Lord Campbell could state as a matter of fact that the lower classes complain most bitterly of the injustice done them . There had been no petitions , because thoro had been no public meetings of those whose wives have been unfaithful to them . —The Bishop of St . David ' s opposed the measure , and Lord DtrNGANNON asked for moro time for consideration ; but the House went into committee , when the various clauses were agreed to , and , on the motion of the Bishop of Oxford , which was carried , on n division , by nine to seven , it was ordered to bo reported on Thursday

    next . The Transfer ok- Works ( Ireland ) Bill was read a third time , and passed .

    THE AUSTRALIAN MAILS , In tho House of Commons , at the morning sitting , Mr . Wilson , in answer to Sir John Pakinoton , mentioned that a contract for five years has been accepted for the conveyance of mails between England and Australia , vid Suez and the Rod Sea , in vessels of at least 2 , 200 tons , with the exception of two vessels of 1 , 800 . Tho first vessels will start from Southampton vid tho Cape in October , returning from Melbourne to > Suez on tho lat of January . The service will then be monthly . A limit of fifty days is fixed for tho pansugo between London to Australia , with a penalty of GO / , a day for any delay which may occur . The Parochial Schools ( Scotland ) Bill having boon considered in committee , tlu > Huubo , adjourned till six o ' olOQk .,., , ,. ., ¦ . . .. , . ., ., ¦ ¦•• ¦ : <•

    .,. ., ) : ,. , ' WW HlHOPflADDON .., ! „ , ..,,. . , , u At tho eveningfliWipg , , Lpr ^ , P » tv » LAMHia , tho Comptooljer of ,.. t , | w > ^ jral , THou » # hoM »»; * J ** W » 4 ^ U >» M

    -with-the Quoon ' a answer to the address on the- subject of Irish education . It was a re-echo of the resolution passed on Monday . , _ .. .. ... ; T ^ E LONDON COBBOBATIOir BILL . ., ' , ' , " . Sir Georoe Grey , replying to Mr . Hanket , ' . ' in reference to the course to be taken vith the London Corporation Bill , stated , that , looking at the advanced period of the session , and the numerous suggestions which he had received for the amendment of the measure , he thought the better course would be to withdraw the bill , and reintroduce it in an improved form , early next session . . ..

    FOWKRAtS BT DISSENTING MINISTERS IN IRELAND . Mr . Pollard Urquhabt asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland , whether the Government was aware that certain of the clergy of the Established Church in the diocese of Dublin have prohibited Presbyterian and Dissenting clergymen from holding any funeral service at the interment of their people in the consecrated burial ground , thereby compelling them , in some instances , to hold the funeral service on the highway , or wherever they best could . —Mr . Hoesman said he was only aware of one case of the kind . The Archbishop had been desired to ask for an explanation , which had been given , and forwarded to the Lord Lieutenant . There was no power to go any farther .

    • WILLS AND ADMINISTRATIONS BILL . The Solicitor-General , in moving the second reading of this bill , explained the principal changes he proposed to make . One main object being to abolish the necessity of all resort to the ecclesiastical courts , a tribunal will be sxibstituted , exercising all the powers of law and equity , and applying them in the simplest manner , in accordance with common law rules . This tribunal is to determine all questions relative to testacy and intestacy , and the rights of parties under wills . It will administer estates during the continuance of litigation . It will also have the power of constituting a real representative in the case of real property , and of furnishing certificates of testacy and intestacy . From the decisions of this court , an appeal will lie to the Lords Justices . With the view of facilitating the proving of wills and

    correcting of informalities , it was proposed to establish a Testamentary-office in London , consisting of able and experienced officers . This Testamentary-office is to have the power of directing wills , which have received probate , to be printed , and copies to be supplied in an authentic shape . District offices , with defined powers , will be established in each of the county court circuits . Other arrangements relate to the establishment of a place of deposit for wills in London , and for a register ; also for rural registries , where printed , copies of wills will be deposited . Compensation , upon a scale of great liberality , will be given to officers , and proctors , and all others entitled thereto—the money to be derived from the fee fund of the new court . The annual amount of compensation will be about 160 , 000 ? ., liable to deductions from death . From the fee fund , 181 , 000 / . is expected to be realized ; so that a margin of 21 , 000 ? . will exist

    to coyer contingencies . . Sir Fitzroy Kelly supported th . 0 bill , which he warmly eulogized . —Sir . James Gkamam . reserved his opinion on several points to a future | stage . —JVlr . Collier also gave only a conditional support to , the measure , which he thought was not improved by the right of appeal to the Lords Justices . —Mr . Malins opposed the bill , conceiving that reform of tho eccU ^ iastical courts , and not abolition , should be tho principle on which the House ought to act . —Mr . John Phiiaimore supported

    he socond reading of the bill , although he was very fur from thinking it in all respects perfect . —Sir Erskxne Per ^ y , Mr . Robert Phillimorh , and Mr . Bowyjbk , suggested some objections to the details of tho bill , without opposing it in the main . — Mr . Watson having briefly expressed his approval of the measure , the bill was read a second time , and it was proposed to go into committee , for discussion , on the ensuing Thursday . The Registration ok Voters ( Scotland ) Bill and the Cambridge University Bill were respectively read

    a third time , and passed . The Dbainage ( Ireland ) Bill passed through com mittce .

    MAYNOOTII . On the order for resuming tho debate upon tho socond reading of the Maynooth College Bill , Mr . Spoonkk moved that tho order bo discharged , observing thut he was satisfied with tho position of the question , having had five divisions in hia favour . But it was his « rin intention to renew the motion next session . Mr . Henry Heiuiekt wan perfectly satisfied with tue course tuken by Mr . Spooner . Aa long aa ho ( Mr . Herbert ) had u seat in that House , lie would take every mich

    opportunity which its forma nn ' onlcd of opposing « bill as this , until ho waa called to order by tho Hpouker . Mr . 1 ' ATiuoit O'liuiEN bad heard tliut tho « tej > tukcu £ o nlgl > t by Mr . Spooucr waa attributable to hi « being converted by the speech of tho lion , member for 1 )»! 1 ,-gnrvon . — Mr . Nkwdjsgatk compkiucd of the lionmember for having yesterday , iu orilor to defeat the " » - tontbn of tbo IJousc , talked an amount of unoomiccU'u nonacnao . ' Th ^ adt ' ics resorted to by llw opponent * <>¦ tho mowouro would Q » ly -oxcito tbo indignation oi pquntry . .:.,. , , ; ¦ i nil . ^ , T , | $ order fyr ^ ho , second . r , oa ( jUng ; was then diacliargfin-

    604, ' |H,E L|A I), | E. [No, 3ff7,,Sa,Y...

    604 , ' | H , E L | A I ) , | E . [ No , 3 ff 7 ,, SA , ynBi > AT , < V . V ~~ W . ' . ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦¦ -i ¦ , B ^ , BaUM ^ ig | r ^^ ffirV ^ # "' A ^^^ ^ ^"'^^ ^ ' ^">*^' ^" **** ^ ^ " * " ^ n-T-Tir ^ lMMIMM ^ M « M ^ M « M ^^ I ^ MAi i «^ * ' 1 I - ^

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), June 28, 1856, page 4, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_28061856/page/4/