SECOND READING. (Hansard, 22 February 1886)

THE BISHOP OF CARLISLE
, in rising to move that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that its object was to remove the doubts which surrounded certain marriages contracted between English and Scotch parties. It often occurred that two people, one of whom was Scotch, desired to be married in an English parish church by banns. The banns of the party residing in England were published in the ordinary way. The Scotch party to the contract produced on the wedding day a certificate stating that the marriage had been proclaimed in an Established Church in Scotland, and that no objection had been raised. The clergyman in England, acting upon this certificate, and considering it as equivalent to a proclamation of banns, married the parties. It was clear to anyone who looked at the Statute 4 Geo. IV., c. 76, that the Scotch certificate did not satisfy the conditions of the Act, which required that the banns 867 should be published in the express words of the rubric preceding the service for the solemnization of matrimony in the Book of Common Prayer. The result of this state of things was that doubt had been thrown upon the validity of such marriages as he had described. He had from time to time warned the clergy in his diocese that it was dangerous to marry parties on the strength of the Scotch certificate, which, however, appeared such a plausible document that it was difficult for clergymen to realize the danger to which the contracting parties were exposed. The purpose of the Bill was to remove all doubts as to the validity of marriages performed in the way which he had described. The measure consisted practically of a clause found in a Bill passed in 1885 by their Lordships with the object of validating certain marriages. The Bill failed to pass in the other House.

§ THE EARL OF SELBORNE
said, that with very little encouragement he would be prepared to re-introduce the Bill to which the right rev. Prelate had referred. It was very desirable to put an end to the continual recurrence of special legislation to render valid marriages about which there were doubts. A very good case had been made out for the second reading of the Bill before the House. It was unfortunate that persons, for want of such legislation, should find themselves in a position of uncertainty about the validity of their marriage. The Bill which passed through this House last year was carefully guarded against any possibility of opening the door to loosely-contracted marriages; it was limited to solemn marriages in church, or other place of worship, or in a Registrar's office; and it was limited to informalities, not in the neglect of, but in the compliance with, those forms required by the existing Marriage Acts which exclude the notion of clandestine or hasty marriages. It was a disappointment to him that, on the change of Government, his Successor on the Woolsack did not accept the principle of the Bill, believing that it would open the door to dangerous laxity. He still believed it would be better to pass a general measure that would obviate the necessity of dealing with classes of 868 cases, and would remove doubts as to legal validity where the error was one of form, and not one of substance.

§ LORD HALSBURY
said, that while he fully concurred in the principle of the Bill, he could not agree to the principle enunciated by the noble and learned Earl opposite (the Earl of Selborne) that a general Act should be passed to legalize à priori all marriages in which there had been a doubt. He was quite unable to conjecture the amount of confusion and uncertainty which would arise were any such Bill passed.