MARRIAGES. (Hansard, 21 July 1836)

Lord Ellenborough
had several amendments to propose in the Bill, to which, not being inconsistent with its principle, he believed no serious objection would be made by the noble Viscount opposite. The most convenient course would therefore be now merely to allow the Bill to go through the Committee pro forma, that those amendments might be introduced, and take the general discussion on a future stage.

§ Viscount Melbourne
approved of some of the amendments proposed to be introduced by the noble Baron, having had an opportunity of looking at them privately. He had no objection to the course pointed out by the noble Lord.

§ Lord Wynford
protested against being considered in any way friendly to the principle of the Bill.

The Bishop of Exeter
said, that when the Bill was first introduced he stated to their Lordships the only ground on which he could consent to forward it even a single stage. He had, in fact, strong objections to both of the Bills relating to marriage and to the registration of births and deaths; and certainly hearing that the principle of this measure was to remain unchanged was no inducement to him to 376 wave his objections to it. He had heard much about the principle of the Bill; but for his part, he should like to know what its principle was? It was not a little remarkable that it professed to be a Bill "to amend the law relating to marriages in England;" but not one word was said as to why this was necessary. Now, if the intention were to satisfy the conscientious scruples of the Dissenters, he, for one, would support such a measure; but that plainly was not the principle on which this Bill was founded, or there could have been no objection to express the intention in words. He was willing to admit, that they should attend to the scruples of conscience of those who objected to the office of marriage as laid down in the Book of Common Prayer; but still he would be no party to any measure which went to interfere with the rites and ceremonies of the Established Church. This Bill, in his opinion, went the length of inviting the members of the Church of England to contract marriage without any religious ceremony; and that was a principle he hoped the Legislature never would adopt. By this Bill parties would be enabled to contract marriage without uttering a syllable as to the nature of the contract, beyond that they desired to live together as man and wife. They would not be even obliged to say that it was a contract for life, notwithstanding it was a contract of the most solemn and binding description. The only period in the history of this country at which a similar attempt was made was during the time of the Usurpation; but although marriage might then be contracted before a magistrate, a strictly solemn and religious formula was enjoined. Here, however, the contract was to be purely civil, and attended with no greater solemnities than would be required for a contract entered into between parties for mere service. He must insist that a contract so sacred and indissoluble should be accompanied by suitable solemnities, and unless this were done, no earthly inducement could prevail with him to allow the measure to progress another stage without opposing it.