DISSENTERS' MARRIAGES (IRELAND). (Hansard, 24 February 1842)

§ Lord Eliot
rose to move for leave to bring in a bill to confirm certain marriages in Ireland, and he apprehended that it would not be necessary for him to use much argument to induce the House to consent to a measure to relieve a large number of her Majesty's subjects who had contracted matrimonial engagements in perfect good faith, and according to what they believed to be the law of the land. For the last two centuries it had been usual for Presbyterian ministers to solemnize marriages where the one party was a Presbyterian and the other a member of the Church of England; and he need not describe the dismay of those persons who were so situated when they found, from circumstances that had recently happened, that their marriages were illegal. A short 1007 statement of these circumstances might assist those hon. Members not already acquainted with them in deciding upon the measure he was about to propose. At the last summer assizes at Armagh, a person named Smith was indicted for bigamy. It appeared that in the year 1830, being then a member of the Church of England, he had been married to a Presbyterian by a Presbyterian minister. They lived together as man and wife nine years, and in 1839 he remarried according to the rites of the Church of England, in a parish church in Dublin, a member of the Established Church. He was tried for bigamy, and his counsel contended that his client was entitled to an acquittal, he being a member of the Established Church, and the marriage having been celebrated by a Presbyterian minister. Counsel for the Crown contended that the marriage was valid, and that it was not necessary that the person celebrating it should be in holy orders, neither counsel contending that within the meaning of the act a Presbyterian minister was a person in holy orders. The objection of the prisoner's counsel was overruled, hut the learned judge reserved the point of law for the consideration of the judges. On the first day of Hilary Term there was a meeting of the judges, before whom the case was elaborately argued, and the decision come to by a majority of eight to two, there being ten judges present, was, that the conviction was bad, as the former marriage was invalid. It would be presumptuous in him to offer any opinion on the subject, but this he might be permitted to say, that until the opinion of the judges was overruled by the decision of the supreme tribunal, before which there was no means of bringing it, it being a criminal case, they were bound to regard the decision of the judges as the law of the land. There was no doubt that the law of marriages in Ireland rested upon a bad and unsatisfactory footing. Marriages by Presbyterian ministers between persons of their own communion were done in a very irregular manner. There were none of those checks which distinguish marriages between members of the Church of England; no notice was required; neither a particular time nor place was necessary; there was no limit as to the persons; and the ceremony was not unfrequently celebrated by degraded ministers. It was, therefore, absolutely necessary that the 1008 whole subject should undergo consideration. He course proposed by her Majesty's Government seemed to be the only one open to them to pursue, namely, to bring in a measure such as he was about to lay upon the Table, for the purpose of giving relief to those parties who were affected by the decision of the judges, and subsequently, in the present Session, to give to the whole subject the most serious consideration with the view to some final and satisfactory settlement. The noble Lord moved for leave to bring in a "Bill to legalize Marriages which have been solemnized in Ireland by Presbyterian Ministers between Presbyterians and members of the Church of England."

§ Mr. Litton
had received numerous communications from the Presbyterians of Ireland, since the intention of Government to bring in this bill had been announced, expressive of their anxiety on the subject, and their gratitude to the Government for so earnest a consideration of a question of such importance to their Interests. They also felt especially grateful for the promise which had been given of a retrospective measure. In the north of Ireland, in particular, such a measure would prove most useful and satisfactory.

Mr. O'Connell
said, there could be no doubt that the class of persons to be affected by the bill of the noble Lord had the strongest possible claim for relief. They married with the full conviction that the marriage was legal, and so far from its having been suspected not to have been so previous to the recent decision, that he would not have hesitated giving it as his opinion that they were perfectly valid. He said this to show that those parties were exculpated from any intention to violate the law by contracting those marriages. He hoped the noble Lord would endeavour to have this bill passed as speedily as possible, because until it was passed it would he open to any of those for whose benefit it was intended to contract, if they were so inclined, a second marriage, and thus morally, though not legally, be guilty of bigamy. He was sure, therefore, that no obstacle whatever would be thrown in the way of the noble Lord's proceeding as speedily as possible with this measure. While on the subject, he must caution the noble Lord against interfering with the law of marriage in Ireland beyond what was absolutely necessary. In England the Marriage-law was 1009 exceedingly strict; in Ireland it was partially strict and partially not so; in Scotland there was great latitude; and the House having already, on a former occasion, discussed the question as regarded another class of her Majesty's subjects in Ireland, he hoped the noble Lord would approach the subject with great caution.

§ Colonel Rawdon
stated, that on the 26th of last January a woman, with four children, applied for admission into the workhouse of Armagh, alleging that her husband, who had lived with her for fourteen years, had deserted her in consequence of the decision of the judges alluded to by the noble Lord, and that having married a female in another quarter, her children had since then been designated bastards. This circumstance having taken place on the 26th of January, he could not join with the hon. Member for Coleraine in expressions of gratitude to the Government, for he conceived that they had been very tardy in taking that course which common sense as well as humanity dictated. He thought it was the duty of her Majesty's Government to have laid this bill on the Table of the House the very first day of the Session.

§ Mr. Serjeant Jackson
said, the Government had introduced this measure upon the very first opportunity, consistently with a due consideration of the subject. It was but a short time since the Parliament had assembled, and some little time was required for deliberation. The very fact mentioned by the hon. and gallant Colonel proved and showed the necessity of having the present measure one only of a retrospective nature; for, if it were made prospective, the man who he said had abandoned his wife, and married again, would necessarily be made guilty of bigamy.

§ Mr F. Maule
thought that the Government had been remiss in not bringing this question forward at the opening of the Session. The time since might open in short, but nevertheless many such instances as that mentioned by the hon. and gallant Officer might, in that short period, have taken place. As connected with the Presbyterians of Scotland, he was glad the Government had taken up the question; and While he regretted they had not done so sooner, he hoped they would lose no time with the present bill, but proceed with it de die in diem.