IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) A & ^ 1.0 I.I 11.25 U^|2£ |2.5 ■so ■^~ ■■■ U ill 1.6 m V] (?> y] #*»*-^ X-"* .^^ l^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical Notes / Notes techniques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Physical features of this copy which may alter any of the images in the reproduction are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t« possible de se procurer. Certains difauts susceptibles de nuire A la quality de la reproduction sont notis ci-dessous. n Coloured covers/ Couvertures de couleur D Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur D Coloured maps/ Cartes g6ographiques en couleur D Coloured plates/ Planches en couleur Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcoiordee, tachetdes ou piqudes D Show through/ Transparence □ Tight binding (may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin)/ Reliure serr6 (peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure) D Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es D Additional comments/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibliographiques D D Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents D D Pagination incorrect/ Erreurs de pagination Pages missing/ Des pages manquent D Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque D IVIaps missing/ Oes cartes g^ographiques manquent n i^lates missing/ Des planches manquent D Additional comments/ CommentP'res suppl6mentaires The images appearing here are the best quaiity possible considering the condition and iegibiiity of the original copy and in Iteeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 repDduites avec le plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de I'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ► (meaning CONTINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. The original copy was borrowed from, and filmed with, the kind consent of the following institution: Library of the Public Archives of Canada Maps or plates too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams Illustrate the method: Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la der- nlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". L'exemplaire filmi fut reproduit grdce i la g6n6rosit6 de !'6tablis8ement pr&teur suivant : La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada Les cartos ou les planches trop grandes pour dtre reproduites en un seul clich6 sont fiim^es d partir de I'angle sup6rieure gauche, de gauche d droite et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n^cessaire. Le diagramme suivant iiijatre la mithode : 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 •J ■ Bi T REASONS FOR RiaKCTINfi T la: J53 PROPOSED ALTERATIONS IN TUB arpp %m of ik g0miniair. BY HIBBERT BINNEY, D. D , BISHOP OF NOVA SCOTIA. HALIFAX, N. S. : BAILLIE & ANDERSON, PEINTERS, 161 HOLLIS STREET. 1880. V REASONS FOB REJECTING THE PROPOSED ALTERATIONS IN THE ♦ ♦ arpfl^ 3m 4 1^^ S^Jminmn. Assuming, as generally admitted, that in a Christian land there must be some restrictions as to marriage between those who are near of kin, we may pssume also that the laws imposing such restrictions ought not to be changed without some good and clearly ascertained cause. The ^juesti^n then arises : Is there any sufficient cause for the change now proposed? Unquestionably it must affect the position of many who are now living happily together as brother and sister, witliout thought of the possibility of any nearer connection, and free from all suspicion of evil, they having, in some cases, been thus accustomed to each other's society for many years, during the life time of the husband er wife, now deceased. Is it reasonable, is it just, to alter the law merely because a few widowers and widows would like to marry a deceased wife's sister of a deceased husband's brother 1 No one pretends that more than a mere fraction ef the bereaved would care to avail themselves of the permission ; and it is contiary to sound principles to legislate for the very few, when such legislation must injuriously affect the welfare and happiness of a nuch larger number. In such a delicate matter as the relations of the sexes, the interests of society demand clear, definite laws, and the dis- couragement of every tendency to tamper with them, unless their effect can be clearly shown to be much more generally injurious than beneficial, which is certainly not the casa with the law proposed to be altered. W« have not the means of ascertaining the number of instances in which the law has been violated in the Dominion, or in which persons within the prohibited degrees are living together without the ceremony of marriage ; but Lord Hatlierley (then Sir William Page Wood) stated some years ago that a careful examination of two united parishes in Westminster, with a population of 60,000, disclosed only three such casevS. And a clergyman of long experience had mat with the following shocking cases of incest, of which the smallest number were with deceased wife's sister — only three ; there being seven ©f men with their own daughters, ten with their own sistars, and six with their own nieces. 4 So tli;vt if tlio tnins^'re.'Hion of tlio hwv \9, to ho adducrij as an ar-g'tiincnt for its repeal, the most slioc'in;,' ahoininiitions may be .sanctionod. Tli(i precodin^ reason is gcii.iral in its application, Ijiit we m lintain further that the restrictions, which it is proposed to annul, are divine. This was ihe judgment of the whole of Christendom for more than 1400 years, and is still maintained and acted upon by ti o Eastern Church. It was so also in the Western Church until, towarc' the end of the IHth Century, one of the Popes was induced to grant a dispensation for marriage with a deceased wifi^'s sister; and we know that Henry VII. had much difficulty in obtaining from -In ius II. a dispensation for the marriage of his iSon Henry with the Avidow of his deceased Son Arthur. These marriages th(^roforG were, and are, condemned by tlie Church of Jiome, but she prefers having the i)ower to give, or rather to sell, dispensations, tiiis power being however tlenied by some of her greatest theologians, as for exau»ple, Thomas Aipiinas specially approved by the ])resent Pope. la tlie UDth Canon of the Church of England it is affirmed that tht? degrees expre-ssed in a tal)le set i'orth by authority, A. T>. 1-')G3, are pro- Ijibited l)y the lawn of (Jod. And in Scotland tlio Confession of Faith, lied by Parliament in 1G90, declares '• Marriage ought not to be within ■ the degrees of consanguinity or affinity forbidden in the AVord. The "man may not marry any of his wift-'s kinibed nearer in blood than he " may of his own, nor the wouiau of her husljand's kintlred nearer iu "blood than of her own.' Now the authority for these prohibitions, is formally and solemnly declared to be Levit., < 'hap. xviii , and it cannot be safe to annul any of them unless satisfactory i)roof can be adduced that all the ancient authorities, and the leaineil Divines of England and Scotland, whose views have been adoj^ted and ratifl(id by the State. were mistaken iu their reading of Holy Scriptu -e ; and every member of a Legislature who votes iu opposition to such /jn'ina facie evidence, incurs a heavy responsibility, nuless he has previously examined it, and convinced him)»elf that it is erroneous. v^ In the chapter oa which the table is based, we have first a prohibition of marriage " with any that is near of kin," and then in v. 16 expressly " with a brother's wife," which the Bill now introduced would hsgal ize. It is true that such a marriage was ordered, iu one specified case, for a opecial purpose, under the Jewish dispensation, but onty when there had been no issue of the first marriage, aud the surviving brother was then so substituted for the deceased, that the first-born son was to be called the son of tne deceased brothei", and not of his actual father. Moreover, lest this command should be misunderstood, or encourage an infringement of the prohibition in other cases, God affixed a special token of his displeasure to the wilful disregard of the prohibition ; ' If a man shall take his brother's wife, it is an uncleaij thing ; they shall die childless." It cannet be protended that this Chapter of Levitiius is of partial obligation, or contains merely ceremonial precepts, for of all the things prohibited it is written, " defile not ye yourselves in any of of those things, for in all these the uatioiis are defiit'tl which I cast out hrl'oro you. niK-l the land is (h'Hled, thorHfoi-o I do visit tiie iui(iuity thereof upon it, and the land itstilf voiniteth out her inhahitants." Ilero then i-< a \varnin{,'to us if we acctipt tl o Word of Gou as a revelation of His will, and wo liavo every reason to infisr that wo are bound by a stricter law, that relaxations i)eyniitted to the Jews are not pevruitted to us (. hristiuns, who are require*! to exerose more self-control, and to aim at a higher degree of purity. lie whom we own as our Ma.«ter, has taugl.t us that )»olygan.iy and divorce, allawtd under the old dispensation, c.innot be jieriuitted to * liristians, and that man and wife are absolutely one This is t! e principh; «f the maxim, that the degrees ot affinity, within which marringe is ])rohibitcd, are the same as thos(i of consan- guinity. Hence, a uu'ii may not marry his wife's sister, any more than his own, nor a woman her husband's brother. Aioreover, sinct, as Bishop dewel has it, "between one man and two sisters, and one woman and two brothers is like iin;ilogy ;" therefore, since, by verse 10, one woman may not marry two brothers, it follows that one man may not marry two sisters, as the piohihition ef marriags with a daugliter is inferred frouj v. 7 where mother and son are mentioned. It should be understood thnt the argument is without any reference to the 18th vei-se, of which we can )nly say t at its meaning is uncertain as shewn by tl)e translation u the margin of oui iJibles, where we read, "oie wife to another," it being understood that the word sister is used merely to signify another woman ; and tin's translation is supported b) its use in several other places. If so it is a prohibition ef polygamy, the words " in her life time " I eing added to show that it does not forbid a second marriage after the death of the liist wife. And we niay infer, if the trjin^lation in the text is correct, that the spirit of the prohibition should protect the wife from the vexation of a sister's rivalry, in the only way in which it can be now dreaded, since poly- gamy is abolished, viz , when looking forward to her own removal by deatli. It is the part of prudence to consider, before taking any step, whether any evil consequences must inevitably follow ; and it is certain that if marriage with a wife's sister, or a hasband''^ brother be allowed, marriage with the dsaighter, or the son of the sist. r, or brother, cannot be prohibited, so that uncles may marry nieces, and aunts may marry nephews, and either restraint must be put on the present familiar inter- course between those who are thus related to each other, or serious evils will result from it. Moreover, it is to be observed that the promoters of the present Bill propose much more tlian has ever been attempted in Eng- land ; and only last year the Secretary of State for India, Lord Cran- brook, argued against the Bill for legalising marriage with a wife's sister, that it would probably be a step towards allowing it with a deceased husband's brother, which the Dominion Parliament is invited to allow at once, but no one has yet ventured even to propose in England. With respect even to the wife's sister, caution should be suggested by the fact that, although there is in England a regular organization by certain wealthy iutemsted families, of paid agents who maintain a constant a_L,'ita- tion,au(l u.seall nossihlo niode.sof inlluouciu;,' public ojjinion ; noverthcless thoir r>ill has Ijcuh ivjoutiid in the House of Coiiiiiions, by four out of ei{,dit parliaments, siuco the IHll was first intioducocl, the majority, by which it lias pu sod in the oth«r four, having,' falhui from ;')2 to 41, while it lias nerer passed a second readinj,' in the House of Lords. And it is to 1)0 observed that the promoters ot tlie Dill, in order to obtain even this much success, have been oliliged to e.\clude Scotland from its operation. And soFue few years a;^o Fo.\ Manle, (Loid Fanuure) w\u\\\ moving tor this exclusion, said : " This (jucstion, which he had undertaken to move, was the only (piestion upon wjiich he could really say that he btjlii-vcil Scotland was (i/m when it the wid- g herself id she is ir union 10 could ly otlier ;e in the 3r, with roforenco to t]i« hus]);ind, hoth in tin* wifo's lift-tiinc, and also in case of her death, there aiv \'t-.\v cases in which they wuld really clioose to inter- marry, and fow<'r still in which, after having children of her own, she weiild 1)0 Ix^tter than any other step-mother to her nei)hows and nieces. So also, with reference to the other marriage intended to be legalised, the presence of a yuungfir brother in the liuusehold, may not then be so satisfactory as it is now. The husl>and is miudi occn[»ied with his pro- fession or his business, anxiously p'-oviding for his family, wliile the Vi-ung'-r brother, lifing much more fr«e, is useful and attentive, and a p'easirit comi)aiiiou to the wife. Tliis is a hap]»y, unobjectional state of things, so long as he can only be a brother, but admit the possibility of u'liriiig" after t!io busl)and's death, and, human nature being what it is, th'ie will probably, in the course of time, bo some feelings of jpalousy mid suspicion in the husband, more especially in cese of ill health. There are probably few husl)ands whoso hajipiness will be incieased by the knowledge that their widows may be married to their brothers. In the Hill now before ParliauT^nt tliere is a proviso that must cer- tainly be condemned, when fully cnsidered, tor it makes the legality of the marriage dejicnd upon*tlie action of parties external to the Parlia- ment. If these marriages should nnhnjipily be legalized it is but just to exempt from any obligation to celebrate them, ministors. who could not do so without transgressing the laws of the body wliereof they are officers; and it is always in the power of any body of Christians to say to its members, you must not take advantage of th's iaw, without a dispen- sation from us, and we f.hall refuse to celebrate your marriage without it. But suppose a mixed marriage, where one of the parties is a IJoman Catholic, or a marriage of Eoman Catholics by a minister v.f another Cliurcb, is the marriage to bo inva'id because such dispensation has not been obtained 1 There are several suj)})osable cases, in whicii this proviso will occasion confusion and uncertainty, and the Legislature might as well undertake to determine what ceremonial shall e essential t