DISSENTERS'MARRIAGES. (Hansard, 22 May 1835)

§ Sir Robt. Peel
begged to ask what course was to be pursued with respect to business, as there were several Orders of the Day equally important, the first of which was the Dissenters' Marriages Bill, which stood for a second reading? He had brought in that measure as a Member of his Majesty's Government in concert with the rest of his colleagues. He then thought, and he conceived the House could entertain no doubt, that it was a measure the conduct of which ought to be undertaken by the Executive. At the same time, as he had reason to believe, from some discussion which took place upon the introduction of that Bill, that there would be no very marked difference of opinion as to the principle on the second reading, he thought it would be inexpedient to drop the order altogether, and at once abandon the charge of it. If, however, his Majesty's Government contemplated any alteration in that Bill which would materially vary its character, he thought it quite clear that the second reading ought to be proposed by them, and that they should fix a convenient day for that purpose. He wished, therefore, to ascertain the noble Lord's intentions with reference to that measure. Of course the 33 main character of the Bill must depend upon its details—and if the noble Lord, approving of the principle, proposed to make any alteration in those details, he would then deliver up the charge of the measure to him, as the representative of the Executive in that House. The noble Lord, in all probability, had made up his mind upon the subject, and would be able to state whether it would be more convenient to read the Bill a second time that night, or to adjourn the second reading to some future day. If there was no objection taken to the principle of the bill, or if Gentlemen were willing to take the discussion in a future stage of the proceeding, he was willing to move the second reading pro formâ. He believed an hon. Member opposite had a notice on the paper which affected the very existence of the Bill. He was not aware whether it were the hon. Member's intention to persevere in that motion, or whether he would waive his objection until the measure came to be considered in Committee.

§ Mr. Kennedy
was desirous of stating, that he had understood that the right hon. Baronet would not bring forward the Bill again, but that another would be substituted by the present Government. Under these circumstances he had withdrawn his notice; and as he had assigned this as his reason for doing so to several persons who had applied to him on the subject, he hoped the right hon. Baronet would not persevere. Many petitions had been prepared against the measure, but they had not been forwarded, on the understanding and for the reasons he had already stated.

§ Sir Robert Peel
The hon. Gentleman had, perhaps, better means of ascertaining what the intentions of his Majesty's Government were than he possessed. He certainly did not understand that they intended to abandon the measure altogether, and he was sure that he had never authorised the hon. Gentleman, by any act of his, to suppose that he meant to give it up. At the same time, if the Ministers thought it expedient, to drop this Bill, and to introduce another entirely differing in its character, he had no wish to press the second reading. If, on the other hand, they, approving of the principles, intended to modify it by alteration in detail, he was ready to give it up to them.

§ Mr. Kennedy
certainly had neither the 34 authority of the right hon. Baronet, or of any Member of the Government, for the impression he had just stated; but it was his general impression, nevertheless. His idea of what his Majesty's Ministers intended to do, was derived entirely from the tenor of the noble Lord's speech in Devonshire.

§ Sir Robert Peel
was quite certain the hon. Gentleman had acted under the impression he had just stated. He only wished to add, on his own behalf, that when the Bill stood for a second reading before, he distinctly expressed his wish that the Government would undertake it. He had, therefore, postponed it—not to a distant period, but to a day by which he thought it likely the noble Lord would have taken his seat in the House. He had acted thus from a conviction of the expediency of passing the measure with as little delay as possible.

§ Lord John Russell
gave the right hon. Baronet full credit for his exertions on this important subject, but must say, at the same time, he thought the Bill now before the House did not appear likely to answer the object of affording practical relief to the Dissenters unless considerable alterations were introduced into it. He believed that such was also the impression of his hon. and learned friend the Member for the Tower Hamlets, who had expressed his doubts on the introduction of the Bill, but who was not now present to state his opinion. Since the measure was under discussion on a former occasion, he had not had sufficient time to consider the details of the subject, or to make up his mind as to what alterations he should propose himself, or support if proposed by other Members. Perhaps it would be better that the second reading of the Bill should be postponed under such circumstances; at all events, whether it were or not, before the proceeding could reach another stage, he would communicate to the right hon. Baronet whatever alterations he might consider necessary, and then the right hon. Baronet might either go on with the Bill or leave the question in the hands of the Government.

§ Sir Robert Peel
said, that he was certainly prepared to propose the second reading of the Bill and support it in its present shape; but the noble Lord's present communication was sufficient for him as to what ought to be his future course, and, therefore, with the noble Lord's per- 35 mission, he would deliver up to him the charge of the measure altogether for the future. At the same time, if there were no objections raised, and if it was understood that there should be no discussion on the present occasion, he had no objection to move the second reading now, as a formal proceeding.

§ Mr. Kennedy
observed, that he had given notice of his intention to propose an Amendment on the Bill when the right hon. Baronet sat on the Ministerial side of the House; but it was not now necessary to press it. He approved of the Bill on this subject which was proposed last year by the noble Secretary for the Home Department, the main parts of which Bill had been embodied in the present measure, and under such circumstances he thought he should be able to approve of the course which he doubted not the noble Lord would take, and was content to leave the matter in his hands.

§ Lord John Russell
said, that the only communication he recollected to have received on this subject, when the right hon. Baronet was at the head of the Administration, proceeded from a large body of individuals who did not conceive it expedient to oppose the second reading of the Bill, but were content to have there opinions expressed in Committee.

§ Mr. Wilks
had no objection to the second reading, but thought that the Bill would require considerable alteration in Committee.

§ Sir Robert Peel
would be extremely sorry that any unnecessary delay should occur in the progress of the measure at this period of the Session, and repeated that, with a view to remove all difficulty, he was willing to move the second reading, pro formâ, on the present occasion, and then to deliver up the Bill to the control of Ministers.

Mr. Mark Phillips
would offer no objection to the second reading under such circumstances.

§ Sir Robert Peel
moved the second reading of the Bill.

§ Mr. Kennedy
said, that the Bill in its present state was exceedingly obnoxious to the feelings of the Dissenters, inasmuch as it tended to deprive the Ceremony of Marriage of its religious character. He thought that the one proposed by the noble Lord (Russell) last year was not open to the same objection.

§ Mr. Hume
was of opinion that the right 36 hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) had acted wisely in leaving the conduct of the Bill in the hands of the present Government, for by the Government alone could it be properly managed. He trusted, that the Government would propose a much more comprehensive measure than that introduced by the right hon. Baronet, and remove all grounds for discontent on the part of the Dissenters, by placing them on the same level, as regarded Civil Rights with the Members of the Church of England. He believed that no Bill for the regulation of Dissenters' marriages would give satisfaction, unless it were grounded on some measure of general registration; and he thought it would be much better for the noble Lord to refrain from making any proposition on the subject, until he should be in a situation to bring forward such a comprehensive measure as would settle the Question for ever.

§ Sir Robert Inglis
thought he should consult the wishes of the House by not urging any objection to the principle of the Bill in its present stage. At the same time he reserved to himself the right of opposing it at a future period.

§ Mr. Pease
expressed a hope that time would be given to allow the public at large to become perfectly acquainted with the nature and effect of the alterations which it was the intention of the present Government to make in the Bill.

§ Mr. Potter
was of opinion, that considering the advanced state of the Session, it would be well to allow the present Bill to drop altogether. No Bill would, in his opinion, be satisfactory to the Dissenters on the subject of marriage unless it were connected with a general registration.

Dr. Lushington
said, that in the course of his professional life he had had occasion to turn his attention to the subject under discussion, and he felt convinced that the preparation of any legislative measure with respect to it must be attended with the greatest possible difficulties, provided due regard was paid to the rights of the Dissenters, without any infringement being at the same time made on the rights of the Established Church. In his humble judgment, the questions of Dissenters' Marriages, of Church-rates, of Tithes, and of Registration, were all intimately connected with the interests both of the Established Church and of the Dissenters, and he felt perfectly satisfied, that in proportion as more comprehensive views were taken on 37 these subjects, the more probable it was, that the House would be able to legislate according to the principles of justice and expediency. The whole of those questions were closely connected with one another; and legislation with respect to any one of them must have a certain effect on the fees of the clergymen. He was, therefore, of opinion that if the Government desired to consider these great questions on true and statesmanlike principles, they must look at their united operation, and regard them as parts of one system; and notwithstanding; that there existed, in the opinion of many persons, an urgent necessity for the speedy settlement of the subject under discussion, he thought that full lime ought to be given to the Government to take a comprehensive view of the whole Question, in preference to bringing in isolated measures, either with reference to the Dissenters' Marriages, Church-rates, Registration, Church Reform, or Commutation of Tithes. Now, he was clearly of opinion that the Government could do nothing with regard to this subject in the present Session. It appeared to him that some hon. Members opposite were not aware of the immense difficulty of the work of legislation.

§ Sir Robert Peel
begged to state to the hon. and learned Member, that during his absence from the House it had been agreed that the second reading of the Bill should be taken merely as a matter of course, with the understanding that the Government should have the future management of it. In allowing the Bill to pass through its present stage, the hon. and learned Member would not be precluded from opposing it, if he so thought fit, on a future occasion. Many Gentlemen had left the House, under the impression that no discussion would take place on the principle of the measure.

Dr. Lushington
said, that it was not his intention to discuss the principle of the Bill, but merely to express his opinion with respect to the impossibility of legislating on the subject at present, in accordance with a comprehensive and statesmanlike view of the whole Question. With respect to the Bill before the House, he would not, after what had passed, say one word; but considering the advanced period of the Session, he could not help thinking, that though legislation on the subject was necessary, delay was infinitely better than inconsiderate and crude legislation. The 38 hon. and learned Gentleman concluded by observing that though the present. Bill might be liable to objections, he felt gratitude to the right hon. Baronet for the admission of the important principle on which it was founded.

§ Mr. Wilks
said, that having understood that the House was not to enter into a discussion of the principle of the Bill, he felt greatly surprised at some of the observations of the hon. and learned Gentleman, which almost challenged reply. Still, after the understanding that had been come to, he (Mr. Wilks) should feel it to be very improper to protract the present conversation; but he must take the liberty of saying, that if the hon. and learned Gentleman stood in the same situation as the Dissenters—if he were labouring under the grievances which they had endured for so many years—he would, in all probability, be very reluctant to allow of any delay in the adoption of measures for their removal.