%^ 
 
 .v^, 
 
 M 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 y 
 
 / 
 
 O 
 
 •ip MP 
 
 
 A 
 
 
 ^/' "% 
 
 fA 
 
 
 1.0 If 
 
 I.I 
 
 !^ IIM 
 
 M 
 
 IIM 
 
 !.8 
 
 
 1.25 
 
 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 ♦ 6" - 
 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 V] 
 
 •c^ 
 
 'W 
 
 
 ^"1 
 
 *^a 
 
 w^ 
 
 .">/ 
 
 7 
 
 % 
 
 M 
 
 ^ ^^ 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 -i!3 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 

 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic No^as/Mores techniques et bibliog.-aphiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 origirial copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 / 
 
 D 
 
 a 
 n 
 
 n 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damaged/ 
 
 Couverture endommagda 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture reslaur^e et/ou peilicul^e 
 
 □ Cover title missing/ 
 Le tit 
 
 D 
 
 itre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gAographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou nuire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Relid avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may causa shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 Lareliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distorsion le long de la marge intdrieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas iti filmdes. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppl^mentaires; 
 
 L'Institut a microfilme le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a ete possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage 
 sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. 
 
 r~~] Coloured pages/ 
 
 D 
 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommag^es 
 
 Pages restored and/oi 
 
 Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxe( 
 Pages d^colorees, tachetdes ou piqu^es 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages d^tachees 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Quality inigale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary materis 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 [~~| Pages damaged/ 
 
 I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 
 I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 
 I I Pages detached/ 
 
 r~| Showthrough/ 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 r~~| Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 r~~| Only edition available/ 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscursies par un feuillet d'arrata, une pelure, 
 etc., cnt 4t§ tilm^es d nouveau de facon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked helow/ 
 
 Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqj^ ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 SOX 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed here hae been rnproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library 
 Acadia University 
 
 L'exempiaire film6 fut repfoduit grflce d la 
 g6n6rosit6 de: 
 
 Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library 
 Acadia University 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and l./gibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Les imagec suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet6 de Texempleire filmd, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last pag'a with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprim6e sont film6s en commen^ant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, seton le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont film^s en commengant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol — ^- (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaTtra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole — ► signifie "A SU9VRE", le 
 symbols V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the uppet' left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul clichd, il e&t film6 d partir 
 de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mdthode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
/» 
 
 fS?^ 
 
 
 VXA^ - ' 
 
 
 m 
 
 
 REVIEW 
 
 _ or SE\ KRAI. LA'l'K I'llil.K'ATIOXS ON 
 
 MARRIAGE 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
 / ' " . 
 
 WITH 3 
 
 i DECEASED WIPE'S SISTER. 
 
 i 
 
 1 UO.M TUB QU.\1!T;:1!!.V kkvikw. 
 
 I^f 
 
 i 
 
 '%^ 
 
 
 
 HAIJFAX, N. S. : 
 
 WESLEYAN CONFEKKNCE HTRAM PRESi^. 
 
 1 8 5 . 
 
 
 
 ii^^>^^ 
 
 
 _1.. 
 
 
 ::^i^ 
 
 1-' 
 
 ii^-::f » 
 
 
 ^^^^^f^ 
 
 r<i, 
 
 in •* 
 
/ 
 
 I > 
 
 J* I 
 
I 
 
 ^ 
 s^ 
 
 ? 
 
 REVIEW 
 
 
 /! 
 
 OF SEVERAL LATE I'UBLICATIO.NS ON 
 
 MARRIAGE 
 
 WITH A 
 
 DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER; 
 
 1 
 
 CONDEMNING THIS 
 
 niOVOSED INNOVATION ON OUR liELIGIOUS 
 INSTITUTIONS. 
 
 imOM TUB QUAUTl^ULV KEVILW 
 
 HALIFAX, N. S. : 
 
 TRIKTED VT Tim WE3LEYAN CONFEUENCE £XEAM VUE^i. 
 
 1859. 
 
MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S 
 
 SISTER. 
 
 the, 1 a. 
 
 ir 
 
 
 ^TE L.'o national characteristics which distipguiah the people 
 Uf'-ed Kingdom from the countries on the continent of 
 
 ihe I c.iC'iity of the Lord's Day and the sanctity of 
 
 > rel^vtion. 
 
 ^ copt.asc cannot be found between England and 
 
 !nde(;d oetwcen any two civilized nations, than that 
 wlnoh w jukl meet the eye of a non-European traveller, who, 
 having parsed jnc Sunday at Gqilais, should pass the following 
 Sunday at Dover : — every shop opened among the. French, 
 every shop closed among the English; one church in Calais, 
 with scarcely one sermon except in Lent; four churches in 
 Dover, with twelve sermons between them ; Calais, with its 
 theatre more full on Sunday than on any other day ; Dover, a 
 town more populous than Calais, without any theatre, except 
 when visited by some provincial company, and without one 
 public amusement of any kind on the Sunday. 
 
 So, again, in respect to the marriage relation. Though the 
 facilities of divorce vary in dilVerent countries, and will always 
 vary according to the nature of the law of marriage in each ; 
 and though there are very imperfect statistics in respect to 
 the numbf r of divorces as compared with the number of mar- 
 riages in any one country ; and though, even if the tables were 
 more full and accurate than they are, the results would give no 
 fair conclusion as to the sanctity in which the marriage relation 
 is held, unless there be in the first instance something like uni- 
 formity in the sanctions under which it is contracted — it is clear 
 
 3T'J*»a, 
 
4 
 
 to every Enrrlisli sojonrnor on the continent that tlio nnnihor of 
 divon-cfl or cfiuivalcnt separations amonnr persons of tlic higher 
 classes in society is immensely greater than in England. 
 
 In the course of the last few years a considerable agitation 
 has been carried on in and out of Parliament, Avith a view to 
 the abrogation of th-. Table of prohibited degrees, or at least 
 to the excision of two out of the number— namely, the marriage 
 of a man with his deceased Avife's sister, and the marriage of"a 
 man with his deceased wife's nioeo. The parliamentary agita- 
 tion commenced, indeed, some years earlier, when J.ord Fran- 
 cis Egerton moved in 1842 for leave to bring in a bill to alter 
 the prohibited degrees. 
 
 No controversialist ever gained anything by mis-statin^^ or 
 under-stating the case of his antagonist. ^V\ will endeavor, 
 therefore, as fliirly as possible, to represent the views of those 
 who advocate the alteration of the table of prohibited de- 
 grees. 
 
 They state in substance—" That in the first instance at tho 
 Creation, marriages, which no human l>eing would now contem- 
 plate without horror, were lawful, because necessary; that, 
 when the necessity ceased, God implanted in his creatures a 
 sense of shame, and repugnance, and disgust at the very 
 thought ; and that they have never since been imagined to be 
 possible, by eith 'r Jews or Christians. That, when^God separ- 
 ated one nation from the rest of the world, and gave them 
 peculiar laws for their government. He not only confirmed this 
 natural horror against such marriages by express and formal 
 prohibition, but added other limitations which in His infinite 
 wisdom Ho then judged to be necessary for tho existing state of 
 society into which He had brought Itlis people ; that these limit- 
 ations, being pro tanto an abridgement of the natural right and 
 capacity of the two sexes to marry at their discretion, must not 
 be extended beyond their very letter, lest we should bo wiser 
 than God, and, should forbid that which he has not thought fit 
 to forbid. That a i)rohIbitiou, like a penal law, ought °o bo 
 construed strictly, and ought not to be made to include more 
 than it specifies ; it being equally easy for God to have added 
 this or that prohibition to the list, if the restriction had been 
 
a<»rooal)lo to His will. That, under those considerations, what- 
 ever (lod has not prohibited, he has allowed ; and while wo <lo 
 not deny the right oi" the civil power to limit marriages in any 
 way which may be recpiired by the civil convenience, as to the 
 a;'e of the parties, for example, we deny its right to invoke the 
 name and will of God as prohibiting that which His Word has 
 lefl oi)cn." 
 
 Passing over the consideration of the primasval state of man- 
 kind, and the universal liberty of marriage which then necessa- 
 rily existed, and which was restricted exactly as the necessity 
 for its existence ceased — passing this over, inasmuch as no one 
 has ever contended for its revival, we may take our stand on 
 the authority for or against tlu' proposed legislation, as such 
 authority is contained in the Bible. 
 
 Though the prohil/ited degrees are many, yet, for all the 
 ])urposcs of argument — we believe we might say, for all the 
 ]>racti<'al purposes which the advocates for the [)roposed bill 
 have in view— the change of law in respect to one degree 
 oidy, and in that degree to one sex only, is the real object. 
 
 We contend that it is prohibited l)y Scripture. 
 
 It is remarkaltle, but it is incontrovertible as a faet, that 
 there is not in the whole volume of Scrijjture any one prohil)- 
 ition or restriction of any kind in respect to the marriage rela- 
 tion, except in the Hook of Leviticus.* Even polygamy is not 
 in express terms forbiddiui by the Gospel ; yet, on that point, 
 inference is as strong as any direct prohibition, and a formal 
 veto is not re(piired to exclude jjolygamy from C hristian society, 
 Ko long as the words of our Lord are heard — " '''or this cause 
 shall a nuin leave fjither and mother and shall cleave to his 
 
 » Kcpeatod in part in Deuteronomy, xx. an-: xxvii. There is a strong paa- 
 Fat,'0 in tlio late ttcv. Thomas Scott's Miscellaneous Letters, an authority, 
 which to four, at least, of the Five Divines will appear wtirlhy of some atten- 
 tion, -jf we reject tlie laws of Leviticus, we have no law of God on the Bub- 
 ject; no, not ajjainst marrying sisters or brothers, or any relation. Now, can 
 we think that God inlende'l to set aside these laws in Leviticus, and to yivo 
 no other in their stead •.' Can we suppose that He meant to leave the Chris- 
 tian Cliurcli tuithout law in this most important matter ? But, if not without 
 law, tlie laws in Leviticus, in all general cases, are in full force."— .S'co«'s Let- 
 ters nvd I'aperif, 8 m, 1811 : " /.^''ter on Marryirnj a Wfe's Sinter," p. 2U. 
 

 
 wne,an.l ll.oy tuain sl.all ho one flosb;" ostal>Il.slnn^ l)y an 
 inforen... ,h omu-lusivc as express wonls, that the union of one 
 ina.| and one ^von.an eonsti.ute.s ex..I,.siveiy (l.e n.arria.e whioli 
 Chnst sanctions. 80 n.ueh for polygan^y. But as to tl.e u,ar! 
 nage o any one man with any one von.an, the nmi.l an.l will 
 God are exj.rosse.I in the Pcntateueh, o. not at all. The 
 .lonee of other books of the Ifoly Canon oon.pels us either to 
 resort to t ,s port.on of the JJible, or to eonelnde that, in th t 
 relafon wh.ch .s of all others the n>ost essential to the existca,; ' 
 Oi our raee on earth-that relation whieh (,o.l instltnte.l in our 
 ate 01 njnoeenee whieh IJe sanetide.l by Hi. own presc^-ce at 
 
 n. ttna brute beasts, those who, n.ay be our pairs. M'ho will 
 auvoeate su.-h a (.oneh.sion V If no one will .-ulvoeato it, the 
 00k of LevUieus eontalns tl>e n.oral an.l universal eo<le of 
 narnage laws, appi.eable to Christians as well as to Jew^- 
 
 lll^e il-^i^It "° '''^' '''''''' ' ''''-' ''-'-' y^-^ 
 
 Many of the cliapters of that book begin with a solen)nitv 
 awh. y suued to a eommunieation from God to man; and n'o 
 Y^' in the .yl,ole Iid,le opens n^ore solemnly than the eicd.t,-enth 
 chapter, wh.eh eontains the laws relating to n.arria!,e. There is 
 a prefaee of five verses, in whieh the ineonmnun-c;ble name of 
 
 : 'I'Tn 'V-"' ''T. '"t^-J-^-^^^ ^■^^ll'"M' "pon all the people ^o 
 avo.d the domgs nt the nations of Canaan, and to do the iud-.- 
 ments an.l to keep tlie statutes and ordinanees of (iod. " Yo 
 slmll therefore keep n.y statutes and judg.nents ; whieh if a n.an 
 do he shall hve I ^.m thk Loin,." And then follows the 
 gieat law pronmlgated with sueh a.i awful appeal-Non, of vou 
 
 shall approaeh to any that is npiv nf I-;., f/i • 
 
 , ^ * "'V n''it IS neai ot km to liini— in mtU'na"e. 
 
 I AM THE Lord. " 
 
 This, then, is the text of the law : the verses, whi,.h Iblh.w 
 
 contani eertan. dlustrarions and speeiueations, suflieient to show 
 
 he n.eamng of the legislator-not Moses, but Jehovah, the 
 
 1^0, d of JMoses : and to fumi^h rules of eonduet to those who 
 
 ---- '^'Haw of (;od i. all ag.s. and who .u-. taught t^;:^ 
 
 

 Ilia ■will by a roasonablo, holy, anJ nocoasary analoj;y, f-nni 
 thin;^s oxpro "scd to things implied. 
 
 It has been contendcil, that tlu' (tninniH of the li'|.'islation is to 
 prevent confusion of blood ; and that there i.> no prohil>ition of 
 marriaj^e where there is no blood-relationship. It is "noiigh to 
 say, in rei)ly to this alle<:;ation, tlmt the very second class of 
 niarriajjjes, which is forbidden, is a class in which such blood- 
 relationship does not exist ; namely, the marriage of a man with 
 the. wife of his father. This single fact, even if it stood alone, is 
 enough to prove, that the Ahrighty Lawgiver, who, under the 
 Gospel, expressly declared tha^ man and wife should be one 
 flesh, here by antici[)ation an(i ^ication announced the same 
 fact; and taught us that, win h.e prohiliitcd a marriage in 
 reference to the ronsarif/uiniti/ of the ))arties, He i>rohibited it 
 eipially in icrerencc to tin', corresponding fij/initi/ of the parties, 
 and disallowed alilco the marriage of a man witli his mother-in- 
 law and the marriagi' of a man with his mother. These speci- 
 fications are painful, but diey are necessary ; since the subi<. . . 
 has been forced upon us by those who seem to be as regardless 
 of the law of (Jod as of tlie law of man; and some of whom, wo 
 fear, will violate the one and repeal the other, defying public 
 decency, destroying the social hai)i)inesH of others, and anxious 
 Gidy to obtain the sanction of u human legislature for the indul- 
 gence of their own passions. 
 
 Their g-cat argument, as we liave already abstracted it, is 
 that the marriage of a man with his deceased wife's sister is not 
 proliibitcd, and therefore is all »wed by (Jod's law; in other 
 words, that what is not forbidden is perm tted. The argument 
 proves too much. No man is fbrl>idden by Vjiod's hiw, tolid-m 
 verbis, to marry his own daughter ; an atrocity never legalized, 
 however practiseil, in Egyot or in Persia 15ut can a Christian, 
 does a Jew, maintain— did any one, entnisted with common 
 sense and couunon feeling, ever tolerate the existence of such a 
 license V Does not every one see, that Avhere, as in the tenth 
 verse, the marriage of a man with his grandaughter is lbrl)id- 
 den, his marriage with his daughter is, a fortiori, still more 
 forbidden, though noAvhcve in very words denounced V Away 
 with a -^ojiliistrv wliidi w(.iiM iolrra*'' -n<h a cfincbisio'i, 'I'lic 
 
8 
 
 fact is, that the general principle iiavinjr beeii cstal:! shed by 
 the public promulgation of the universal law in the sixth verse 
 Its apphoatior to particular cases is sometimes speoilied, an.l 
 sometmies left to a necessary analogy ; and thus, -.vhile the 
 marriage of a man with his own daughter is necessarily included 
 in the prohibition of his marriage with his grandaughter, the 
 marriage of a woman with her uncle is included in the prohib- 
 ition ot the marriage of a man with his amit— a relation forbid- 
 den in express words to the one sex being, by all fair rules of 
 construction, forbidden to the other also. 
 
 But it is said, hoivever reasonable and conclusive this ar-u- 
 ^ent may be, as applied to other degrees which may \o 
 included by analogy, it does not apply to the particular rela- 
 tionship, .11 respect to which the proposed legislation is directed. 
 " It IS true, indeed, that the particular chapter in Leviticus 
 iorbids the marriage of a man to his brother's widow, but you 
 must not go on to extend the prohibition by analo-y, and to 
 iorbid the marriage of o^ie man to two sisters ; sinJe, even in 
 the case actually forbidden, we find in the same Pentateuch not 
 a mere dispensation in the case Qf individuals, but a specific 
 injunction of such marriage as a general rule." The answer is 
 obvious. That the prohibition was a part of the universal law, 
 by which the whole Church of God is to be governed; the 
 injunction, where it was an injunction, was a part of the muni- 
 cipal law of the Jews, arising out of their exclusive position, and 
 which God accordingly issued in order that the name of no 
 family among Hi? people might be " put out of Israel." This 
 is fully proved by the context, which, while it leaves a discretion 
 to the bro.ther to marry, or not to marry, his brother's widow— 
 (a discretion which alone is sufiiciinit to remove it from the class 
 of injunctions)-tra...fers to the then next of kin the ri-ht and 
 the duty of marrying such widow, as it was exercise.? in the 
 case of Iliith and Boaz. 
 
 It IS said, however, that the particular case was brou-ht 
 before our Lord Himself, and that He manifested no disar.pm- 
 b^n_ofit|* which, if it ha.l bcHm_contrary to the Book of 
 
 
 
9 
 
 Leviticus, he would have (lone. The answer is, that the case 
 l)oin<r expressly in conformity to an injunction or quasi-injunc- 
 tion^^^hich, for purposes exclusively national, had been pro- 
 mulgated in another Book of the rentateuch, our Lord, reply- 
 in;r to Jews, did not think fit to pronounce any sentence upon 
 the conduct of those who had acted in such conformity ; but He 
 took advantage of the opportunity, a-.d taught them and all 
 His people, in every age, that in the other world— the world to 
 which all the parties in the question had already gone, and to 
 which we are hastening—" They neither marry nor are given 
 
 in marriage." 
 
 If, after all, it be said, that an injunction to a man to marry 
 his brother's widow renders it at least allowable for a woman to 
 marry her late sister's husband, it may be replied, firstly,^ that 
 the argument itself admits that a permission, and if a permission 
 then a prohibition, may be transferred from one sex to the 
 Other— the very ground on which we contend that a prohibition 
 to a woman to marry her husband's brother included a prohib- 
 ition to a man to marry his wife's sister 5 and secondly, that, if 
 this injunction be binding on us, and be not, as we contend, a 
 local and national law applicable to the case of the Jews at that 
 time, and to them only, then it must be taken with all its 
 adjuncts also, and it is good for him, and for him alone, who 
 marries his brother's widow, there heintj no child of such first 
 
 marriage. 
 
 We proceed, then, to consider not what in the judgment ot 
 any individual may be the Scriptural view of the particular 
 case, but what is the interpretation of Scripture, which, for at 
 least fifteen centuries, has been recognized and afiirmed by the 
 
 Church. 
 
 It is said, that even if, for the sake of argument, it be con- 
 ceded that the Church has denounced the marriage in question 
 as un-Scriptural, we are brought back to "Dark Ages;" and 
 that in the purer days of the Apostles the licence was uncon- 
 trolled. Surely, if we prove that a given view of Scriptural 
 morals can be traced for fifteen centures, it is for those who 
 deny that it can be traced further back, to prove that the licence 
 existed prevlouslv uncliecked by the authority of the Church. 
 
10 
 
 Hb ted just as we contend that forging seamen's wills was 
 
 ml:Tm "" T-"" "' ^^°^«^ "• ^-^ -' "^ the reign o 
 Edward nr merely because the offence grew up in the 1 8th 
 century and was unknown in the 14th 
 
 then, may bo^found in every branch of the Church. 
 No man, indeed, can deny that the Church Catholic is on 
 
 Scotland, the Church of Home, and the Greek Church differ- 
 ing as they differ upon almost every other point-no ,ndfed 
 of dogmatic theology, since in God's gracious provid nee the 
 great truths of the IIolv Trln.Vv tifo t i' "^'^^"^e ine 
 
 Atonpm^nf 1, 1 ^ J^^^^^ty, the Incarnation, and the 
 
 Atonement have been preserved and enshrined alike in all 
 «.ese Churches-but differing a. they differ upon ,uesti ns 
 
 theless united m respect to the prohibition which the English 
 Tarhament is now urged to sweep aw^y. ° 
 
 staferinT"' ''}''%''.'''' Church has been elaborately 
 Z 53 ^ir^-'^r ''" I^^l-^^of t^- Commissioners 
 A .ir u I' '' '''''"^^ ^^ ^"°^° '^'^ ^°^ds of the C- aon 
 wiXi-L "^";;.^''^""°^«^'^rrJ two sifters; for his deceased 
 wite s sister is as his own sister." 
 
 The doctrine of the Church of Rome, irrespective of Scrip- 
 
 edged fac that such marriage requires a dispensation, prores 
 
 o'ulTbTre '• Tr- P---^'>'P-^^i^ited,'no displ^latio 
 could be r cpured. It is true that Bishop Wiseman regards the 
 whole as " matter of ecclesiastical legislation ;" but it Ts a ques- 
 tion o the judgment of tiie Church of Home upon the lawfu - 
 
 mit th^f ' "'"''^'"' '"^ "'' ^" '' *^" =^^""^ °^ --1^ judg- 
 ment, that we are now referring to that Church. '< It wa the 
 
 dohberate mind of the Western Church, her Council 
 
 lopes her schoolmen, her Canonists, that these inarria... w re 
 
 and Canonis s deliberately taught that the Popes could „ot 
 I usponse withm those degrees. Pope Zachary (A. D. 7.5) lu-ld 
 ^t a thing incredible th,t a Po.e should di^ense contrarv to 
 
11 
 
 the Canons of the fathers. Pope Innocent Til. (A. 1). 1108) 
 and Pope Eugenlus (A. D. 1431-1477) held and answered that 
 the Popes could not dispense in those degrees." * And the 
 general truth is stated in these words : — " Within the Levitical 
 degrees there is no instance whatever of any dispensation until 
 Alexander VI., at the close of the 16tn century." It is hardly 
 necessary to add, that the c oncentrated evil of man's nature 
 was embodied in the person of Alexander VI. ; and that a dis- 
 pensation first granted by him would even from that very 
 circumstance become an object of suspicion. But we need not 
 pursue this subject. There is no record, and there is no alle- 
 gation, that any such dispensation was granted for the fifteen 
 centuries before him ; and as the fact of a dispensation implies 
 a prohibition, the voice of the Church of Rome on the general 
 question is united with the voice of tiic Greek Church " against 
 the marriage of any man with the sister of his deceased 
 wife." 
 
 The voice of the Church of Scotland is not less distinct. The 
 Confession of Faith, in chapter xxiv, , 3ection iv., says expressly : 
 " Marriage ought not to be within the degrees of consanguinity 
 or airinity forbidden in the Word; nor can such incestuous 
 marriages ever be made lawful by any law of man, or consent 
 of parties, so as those persons may live together as man and 
 wife. The man may not marry any of his w ife's kindred nearer 
 in blood than he may of his own ; nor the woman of her hus- 
 band's kindred nearer in blood than of her own." And be it 
 always remembered, that this passage is not an insulated text 
 from a popular work of hortatory theology ; it is a portion of 
 the doctrine of the EstabUshed Church of Scotland, which has 
 ')ecn recognized and ratified by the Parliament of that ancient 
 kingdom; f which became the law of the land of Scotland 
 during its independence, and was confirmed in perpetuity by 
 the Act of Union, which, while it surrendered that independ- 
 ence, secured the legal maintenance of the doctrines of its 
 Church. The law of that Clmrch and the law of that land are 
 maintained by its courts. As our present object is rather to 
 
 »» rrefaco to Pusey and Badclcy, up. lix. Ix. j 1 Will, and Muiy, act. 5. 
 
12 
 
 quote the authority of the Churrh of Scotland in respect to the 
 interpretation of Scripture, and to sliow how entirely it accords 
 in this instance with the authority of its opposite extreme, the 
 Church of Home, wc do not fellow the (question into courts of 
 Scotch law, further than to state that the Lord Advocate, Mn 
 Rutherford, being specifically asked the question as to the 
 legality of the marriage of a man with his deceased wife's sister, 
 refers the Commissioners to the great Institutionalist, Mr. Ers* 
 kine, who, in his Title of Marriage, (book i. title 6) says ex* 
 pressly in section 7, "that marriage is null when it is con- 
 tracted wiihin the degrees of propinquity or affinity forbidden 
 by law ;" and afterwards in section 9, " that as to the dco-rees 
 m wh'*':h marriage is prohibited, the law of Scotland has 
 adopted the Jev/ish law, by act of 1567, c. 15." He then adds, 
 " that the degrees prohibited by the law of Moses of consan- 
 guinity, are in every case virtually prohibited in affinity ; and, 
 by the aforesaid act of 1567, the prohibition is equally broad 
 in the degrees of affinity as in those of consanguinity. Thus, 
 one cannot marry his wife's sister more than he can marry his 
 own." * The feelings of the people of Scotland sustain their 
 Ch-irch and sustain their law. The Lord Advocate confirms 
 this when he adds, " not only that no clergymen of the Church 
 of Scotland could venture without incurring the pain, I think, 
 of deprivation of ofllce, to celebrate such a marriaffe with a 
 knowledge of the relationship of the parties, but that such a 
 marriage generally is held by the people of Scotland in very 
 great abhorrence." f The Lord Advocate is accurate in this 
 view of the penalty which a clergyman of the Church of Scot- 
 land might incur by celebrating a marriage within the prohib- 
 ited degrees. There is an early and very remarkable case, in 
 which the liev. James Forsyth, who was guilty of this oflence, 
 but who could state, on the other hand, " that it was the only 
 miscarriage with which, in a ministry of thirty-five years, he 
 could be charged," was nevertheless deposed from his oflice 
 and living for having thus violated the laws of God and the 
 Church. The Lord Advocate further says, in respect to the 
 
 « Eciiort, p. 100, X, 1111. 
 
 t r. 101. 
 
n 
 
 y.avCies tliemselvos, that '' in the severer and more ri^^M-oiiS, afj 
 ^we\\ as violent times of the midtlle of the ] 7tli century, there 
 are eases in which tliat connection appears to have Ixxin pun- 
 ished, and punished even capitally."* In this state of the law 
 and of the religious opinion of Scotland, we arc not surprised to 
 iind that the Lord Advocate, in a later portion of his evidence, 
 states—" These marriages take place in Scotland, I should say, 
 hardly at all. Certainly, I do not think that persons in the 
 better classes of liie would be received in society, having made 
 such a marriage ; and I should think that in the lower orders 
 tlu) impression against it was very strong indeed." f The great 
 constitutional organ of the Established Church of Scotland, the 
 General Assembly, a body which contains not only the leading 
 ministers of that Church, but— be it always remembercd— its 
 leading laymen also, has recently adopted unanimously a peti- 
 tion to" both Houses against Mr. Wortley's bill ; and it is most 
 satisfactory to add, that the (;eneral Assembly of the Free 
 Churcii has also, in like manner, ur.animously addressed a simi- 
 lar prayer to Tarliament. The faculty of Theology, repre- 
 sented by its Dean, the Frinci[)al of the College of Edinburgh, 
 has in like manner solemnly remonstrated against the mea- 
 sure. 
 
 The voice of the Church of Enghmd is heard not less loudly 
 and distinctly than that of the other Churches to which we have 
 listened. She speaks in her Canons, in her Table of Prohibited 
 Degrees, and in every institutional writer without exeeption, 
 from the Reformation downwards. We challenge contradiction 
 on this point. We do not include the Five Divines whose 
 off-hand letters form one of the subjects of this article ; since, in 
 those letters, they do not profess to expound the doctrines of 
 their Church. But those who seek the teaching of the Church 
 of England will find it in the OOth Canon :— 
 
 " No person sliall marrv within tJic decrees proliibited by the laws 
 of God, and expressed in a Tnl.le set fortli by authority in the year of 
 our Lord (iod 1563. And all m.'U-nnoes so nuidc and rontracted 
 shall be ndjudged incestuous and unlawful; and consequently shall be 
 dissolved as void from the bcginnin,!,- ; and the parties po mariymg 
 
 « P. 101, f. 
 2 
 
 t P. 103, A. 1118. 
 
14 
 
 xfiallhyconrpe of law be separated. And the aforesaid Tulilo sfialJ 
 le in every Chiirch publicly set up and fixed at the charge of the 
 Jmridh." 
 
 '*Now, here," snya an able controversialist on this subject,, 
 ♦"we have a dtyclaration of the Chnirh of England — tl»e very 
 same authority ot" the Chnrt-h whieli gave its sanction to the 
 Articles, the Book of Common Prayer, and the Homilies, ar.d 
 which abolished the Papal Supremacy, and carried on the 
 Reformation — a declaration, that these marriages are prohibited 
 by the laws of God, and incestuoois." V/e may add, that if the 
 authority of Convocation Avere snlHcient to establish the Thirty- 
 nine Articles as embo<lying the mind of the Church of England 
 On the points to which they relate, the authority of Convocation 
 is equally sufficient to establish the Ninety-ninth Canon as em- 
 bodying- the mind of the Church of England on the point of the 
 law of Cod in respect to th« Proliibited Degrees. 
 
 The advocates of the new licence say — " Yoti, who quote the 
 authority of the Chnrch, mast, for cCTisistency's sake, obey every 
 other Canon of that Church ; you are not at liberty to pick and 
 choose. You, clergymen, sometimes wear white stockings, 
 though the Canons forbid them; and, therefore, you have no 
 right to object to the marriage in (juestion, though the Canons' 
 prohibit it." The answer is easy — If the Chtirch enjoined black 
 stockings on the aidhot ity of Scripture, and could produce any 
 Scripture as requiring it, the cases might be parallel ; but the 
 distinction is in this — that the Chnrch not only prohibits the 
 marriage, but specially alleges Scripture as authority lor such 
 prohibition. Whatever be the obligation of the Canons on lay- 
 men, whatever be the soundness of the Scriptural authority 
 therein quoted, as forbidding the nian-iage now in question, 
 though we have not the shadow of a doubt as to its sufficiency, 
 the main point is, we think, established, that the Church ot 
 England unites with all other great divisions of the Universal 
 Church, in so interpreting their common Scriptures, as to de- 
 noimce <:Lc marriages which are now sought to be permitted. 
 
 The expounders of the mind of the Church of England, from 
 their seat of judgment, proclaim the same doctrine. In the 
 celebrated case of Ray v. Sherwood, ia which Mr. Shcrwoot^ 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
15 
 
 I 
 
 had married the sister of his deceased wife, Sir Herbert Jenner 
 stated : — 
 
 " In the first pliif-e, this is a contract which is prohibited by the 
 laws l)otli of (io:l and man ; for so, sittinfr in an ecclesiastical court, 
 I siioiild he hound to consider it, even if I were, as 1 am not, amonj,' 
 t\u' m.n)lK.H- of those who privately entertain any d.oui)t upon tlie 
 ^ul)iect * f' * * But whatever mav have heen the intention ot 
 the Leoislatnre, and whatever may ho the etfect of ttiis Act i^ I'i'V >a- 
 ment the marriatre had hetweeu tJKi tv,o parties, Ihonias MouUlei. 
 Sherwood and Emma Sarah Ray, is an incestaaous marrui-e, and 
 must ever so remain. Tlie hiw of God cannot he altered hv m.in. 
 The Le<rislatwx' may exempt the parties fioin ])vunshment ; it may 
 le-mlizcrhMinanlv speakinfr, every prohibited act, and -jve el2ect to 
 anv contract, however inconsistent with the Divme law ; butnciinnot 
 chan-e the character of the act itself, which remains as it was, and 
 nmst alwavs so remain, whatever be the etfect of the Act ot lar- 
 liament." * 
 
 Tills is the solemn authoiity of the highest court of ecclesias- 
 tical law in England. The unanimous judgment of the Queen's 
 Bench in tlie more recent case of Chadwick, has decided— what 
 could hardly have been pi^eviously mnbiguou*— that the mar- 
 riage of any man with the sister of his deceased wife is no 
 marriage ; and, conseriuently, that the marriage of the husband 
 with a third woman, while the unhappy being, the sister of his 
 first v/ife, was still living, was not bigamy. 
 
 What Scripture has denounced, what the Church ha- forbid- 
 den, what the law has prohil)ited, is eciually iiMionsistent, as 
 might well be exptcUid, with the best interests of social 
 
 life. 
 
 Those who feav not Ood, neither regard man—m other 
 words, those who disregard the authority of Scripture, the voice 
 of the Church, an/l the law of the land, can Utile lie expected 
 to stop in their coarse from any eonsid<3 ration of the social evils 
 and domestic misery which will follow their success. But those 
 law-makers who have not broken the law, and do not desire to 
 alter it in order that they may do that which at present it for- 
 bids, ought to consider the effects of the proposed measure upon 
 otluirs, as well as on the law-bi-eakers. 
 
 In the actual state of public feeling and of the law, a maa 
 
 Stephens's Ec ilcBiastical ami Eleemosynary Statutes, vol. ii, p. 1049. 
 
w 
 
 >^^ up „ the s,sters of his wife a. upon his own sisters ; an.i 
 w.fo hnngs .nto her new abo.h^ hor own .i.t.r.s as havino- 
 
 own "^Y'^'Tlr ''" ^'"'"'""^'^ ^^^''"*^'^'" ^"'1 "^t-'t-"« as hi: 
 n S.S 0..S by blc<.l. In Hie the, are united as one flunilv ; 
 
 In 1 ?. T '^'^"'^'''' '^ '^''''^ '^'' ^"^^'-'''^'^ ^!^t«'' ^^y I-ok 'to. 
 
 I f the w.fe be to. feel that her sister n>a,- beeon.o her rival 
 anrl her successor, she will panse before she hazanls the inter- 
 ruption to her own peace which the in.tro<lucti.^. of such an- 
 ZZ7'Tr"' !'' '^' '"^^"^^ constitution of the la^ 
 
 fhoeir"?""'''/"' ''''"^^' "^' l'^^-^'"^' *« '"^ -i*"^'- 
 sistu those bhanelcss and tender attentions which he pays to his- 
 
 own sister. He can i>ay then, t^ no other won.an e Jep't ^o hi. 
 own s^ter; he sees his wife's sister as he sees his own with a 
 f don. w „ch .s pure to the pure ; and which we are confident 
 IS in bdged HI by thousands and tens of thousands with no other 
 -ofon than that w-hich is felt b; the same n.en toward! 
 the.r own .sters;--the idea of any other affection never for an 
 .us nt nsing .« the minds of eit her party ; ^he husband .aining 
 
 r oTrt;"''"^""'""'"°"^^''"' ^'"--^'« h--t thus 
 opened to. all her connexions only a new proof of his expandin-. 
 
 interest ,n herself. But change the sister of a >vlfe into i youn^ 
 marriageable stranger, and the attentions which are now 
 oflered by the husband and received by the sister, and wit- 
 nessed by the wife, with purity, with dclicacv, a k1 with con- 
 i.^ ence, become insults alike to both females. The union 
 ^luch IS. daily seen in families will, where it now exists, be 
 broken, and will never herealler be fcx-med : the relation of 
 brother-,n- aw and si^er-in-law will cease to exist; the parties. 
 BOW described by those terms will lienceforth be stran-'ors to- 
 each other ; and the reflected tenderness, which now" bhul. 
 them to each other, must Ix. abandone.l by both as a snore an<l 
 a danger ; while the wife will be deprived of that support and 
 comfort which she now derives from the presence of the sister 
 ^t her youth a^ a companion in her own house. This is well, 
 mtr^p^sT^l^^'^'^^ "Englishwoman, a Sifter a.d a 
 
 1 
 
 li 
 
 ! 
 
17 
 
 •' Thnni-hout the whole ranjre of domestic connexions there is not 
 
 S"^\V; t "^nk.-" the cheo.^uU.ossof al|e.tion that ox.^ 
 ^ m;Ulv between hrotlu^r a,ul .ister, tl>ere -^^1?"^^^ t .• 1 e 
 
 C vm en , dotruot. .vothin,^ from the playful ^-onhdcnce or the 
 
 enSou watWth that di.stiu«uishos it, .i no ^^7'^^-"' f ^»J^^^!^ 
 
 f... lie .eon to t:rea.tor advanta-e. Emulous to pease toi the sake 
 
 .f . iloved .Si uratdwl to the imshand for the hapjuness he eon- 
 
 7ir o o\^- Sr'to her, fearless of any -i->-^'"tTra 't rll^' 
 
 >^ewrshe is n.vcr ho u.uch at her ease, never so "^^iTif:^ « , f ;"i^; 
 
 ■,n.ii.~» ;w.'mc.irod In- tlio uttoi-lniivm .l.o Jlws i ,*»cs anil 
 . b S who diti^'in n. iher re.peet iron, other women pu. 
 
 iiess 
 tion. 
 
 * * 
 
 last eonhne iijiuseii wumi. un- .--....-.. ^. ,.--, _ 
 " F^^rnm- restrietion, we consider, removed teinpta 
 ■f.^.".^- .,,.,. .....t mid source ot uU that is to b( 
 
 rion. The ima,:inat..n, that root and ^-^^^' ^^ f.^^^^^ 
 
 >.usetl it— ' 1 had. M«t known sin but through the law. 
 
 GntUksr^bject we have seen a remonstrance from a lady 
 .nowPobnge^voung, against the praposed measm-e; stating, 
 rL.tauc; tiiat hiving been the tlr.t married of her lamily, 
 she had received in her hou^e her sisters as they grew up, 
 ^.ho, in sueeessioa, had married;, that this continuance of eariy 
 uffe tion could not have bee^ indulged if she had telt that she 
 was introducing under her o^yn root-particularly at the peno s 
 of her own conrmeinent.-those who were to be placed ui neare. 
 intercourse with her i.usband than any strangers could be, and 
 yet who were not tc.lp.. protected by the san.t.ty of that rela- 
 
18 
 
 tionshii) which, at the time, actually surrounded them As he 
 law was and is, the harmony was never for an instant hazardwl 
 by a suspicion; but, as Mr. Wortley will make the law, the in- 
 tercourse will become impossible, and a sister, onco married, 
 can never receive an unmarried sister into her house in tiie 
 present fuVness and freedom of contidence. Ihe widower, 
 likewise, will suf^H' equally. At present he receives-the Com- 
 missioners cannot be '.gnorant of the fact--the aid o his 
 deceased wife's sister as her best successor in the charge oi hei 
 chihlren. That sister enters his home with a conh.lence and a 
 purity which, if he had had a sister of his own blood he could 
 not find surpassed in her case. As the law now stands, and as 
 the feelings of society are developed, the deceased w. te s ^s ei 
 remains in the widower's house, or enters it >n the must of hi 
 sacred sorrows, and soothes them, and adopts his children and 
 supplies her lost sister's j.lace to them, without one though c.io 
 him which one oi his own blood might not blamelessly lu- 
 
 "^"aU this must be blotted out from English society And 
 .vhere is it to stop ? If A. B. may marry one sister, C., he may, 
 after her death, marry another sister, D. • and, it there be a 
 third, he may look forward to the prospect of marryn g 1.. - 
 We ask, can either D. or E. ever be to him or to C. what she 
 now is V-she is lost to both as a sister. Mr. Keb e has we l 
 put the case, in substance-the word sUler-in-laio will henceiortb 
 disappear from the English language ; as the relationship Uselt 
 ^vill be expunged from English life: "the very name will be- 
 come an absurdity, if ouce this change is made-the relation, 1 
 mean, of sister-in-law." 
 
 It has been asked in rarliamont-and wo have already 
 hinted at the question-where, if the proposed law shdl break 
 down the present lines, is the inroad to stop ? We repeat the 
 question formally : is there any consistency in stopping wher e 
 
 • .. Ther<^y^^^7i^^iiJu^^7^^^^^ ^here a man married three sisters in 
 
 6Uccessiou."-Evidence. Ana. 1040. " I saw one woman wljo . as the tlu,-d 8JB- 
 ter the man had married ; and her expression to me was. that if ^^« ^ al. .ho 
 believed her husband would have the fourth. That was in Shetlleld. -Aub. 
 150. 
 
 
19 
 
 Mr. Wortloy stops ! H^ ""U ^^^^ ^^^^^. „f 
 
 thousand, of men »"^°\ '"" *"X „ son.c of its dear and 
 h„.anU the l>a,,.™c„ ol domes \>^- , j,„, 
 
 „ow sacred relations ; but d^s^e ^ UUt l^^ J^ ^^^ ^^^^ 
 
 he only makes '^^^^ ^Z:^ rest^ints on .narria^e. 
 
 cnoush to maintain It, >s „.|.,ti„,„hin ; we mean, such a 
 
 „,.e,,t where there ts a '•'""'"'•'-'r ' i,,,', '.. ,to,„" say, a still 
 U„od.rela.io„shipasnaturea,h.. . _^^^^^^^^.^_^^, ,_y j.„„,. 
 
 holder one, "why ...on d "^ '''"> ,. y,; ,,„,„„t pnr- 
 .ernples a^ont natt.re aUiorrn,, . " _^_^^_ ^^^^^^ „^^ 
 
 sue this snbieetlurther; >"';.;"',„,,,,,„„, „f ,y/,„i/, is eon- 
 rid of all prohibition m respect to «o ^,^^^^1 _^^ ^.„„,j 
 
 sistent with a principle-o.lion», ^'^ ^y „,- „,„ prohib- 
 
 ,,e the working "^ ">»' P''"''''''".' !^^" , "„ree, for which heaven 
 ition in respect to the one F™- ''-',,;,, „ ,hct, and does 
 
 and earth are now moved. » ;^,^ ^^,y,,,„„ „.■ establish- 
 not attain, even in theoi), till n 
 
 ;„„ a mischievons principle. ^^^^^ 
 
 We have jnst said, and inuch oh V^^^^.^^^ .„ .,, „„, 
 all of our preceding ,ino.at,o,isba^e.^_^^ ^^^^ ,^^y^^ 
 
 prominent degree now «>"i^'" " '"•^,;; ^..friage of a man with 
 !,,• Prohibited Degrees; -' " -• V „ust not conceal from 
 
 the sister of bis ^^-^^^i^ , " ' ,,„,,„.es to legah^e another 
 our readers that Mr. W 0, ley s 111 11 ^_^_^^^j^ .^_ ^^ „„ 
 
 „„•,„„, wliieh, though <«1""'';"'> " „^„,,„ „,,„„ive than that 
 apprehension, in some respects c ., 1^ _^^^^__._^^^ ^^.^^ 
 
 „ a widower widi bis late w, es sister ^^^ „,.,,ery 
 
 '-■ "--v'" fcf t f::Lt ::;:;., ...at in the vast 
 
 portion of the subject. Jt . exceeds, and some- 
 
 Lijority o. all -'.■■••';«» *;»f,t "^ ".»' ■» "- "^' 
 .•„„es greatly --^■"'l%'.''f:'l be conceived nnder the pres- 
 majority of the cas.s -^'-\~ ^^,^,, ,ha„ bis second bride 
 
 «="''rb,''::^!i"d"i:.r ti! t:! -mage, whom be ongH. 
 
 -probably a child d " " = ^^^^^^j ^yes. 
 
 never to have regarded except P ^^.^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ 
 
 But such cases are brought lorwaia 
 
•20 
 
 tho Commissioners— what Mr. Tliornburn calls familiarly " iiicco 
 ciises." Wo do not hero conrmc otirsi>lv«'s to those alliances 
 which Mr. Wortlcy dcsiri's to jK-nnit. Wo do not ret'cr to a 
 Jiirminf!;ham clcriiyinan marryiii}; his witi.''s niece — now a 
 " beneficed cler<ryman," by the bye, living " jierfectly eomlbrt- 
 able " in the Avitness's parish ; * nor to a Xorfblk n;a<iistrate 
 who was not aNhamed to contract the same unholy alliance; ; f 
 nor to those at Shelhcld who " occasionally " marry the wife's 
 niece; J but we do refer to eases "where a man had mar- 
 ried his mm hlecp." ^ It is to this class of cases that Mr. Thorn- 
 burn had so naively adverted — " I dare say I may have, in the 
 course of my notes, two or three other eases, but not more." 
 Another of the barristers, sent forth to make imniiries, says — "I 
 think there are about six instances of marriap:es of the party's 
 own nicjes, not deceased wives' nieces." (Foster's Evidence, 
 p. 4.) This is not t!ie worst : " there were one or two, out of 
 the sex, where a man had nuvrried the mother and the daujrli- 
 ter; but I think six is the outside of those cases." (Foster's Kv., 
 Ans\ or 1 7, p. 4.) " One," says another inqulrinn; barrister in 
 another district, " married his wile's mother." (Aspiuall, An- 
 swer 47, p. 6.) II 
 
 And it is to the prospect of such eases, and to the increase of 
 alliances which we believe to be reijiignant to the law of God, 
 that we look fearfully — when the barriers shall Ije broken down 
 which now, by the double sanction of " Scripture and our 
 
 « Evidence of lU;v. S. Gurbett, A. 1073, 1074, compared with eviaciii-o of J. 
 Brutherton, Esq. (Evidence, \>. 9), unless, which we hope is not the case, lue 
 witnesses refer to two dilloient unions. 
 
 t Evidence, p. 12. reili.iiJo tlu; u.une cast, is stated in p. 14. 
 
 I Evidence, Answer i !:.'. n. io- 
 § Evidence, Answer lis, p. i2. 
 
 II This more than realizes tho case already put too happily by Dr. Pusey, in 
 arswer to Mr. Hatchard, who had contended in his cvidcnco before tho Com- 
 missioners that, though uian and wife are called "one ftesh " by the word of 
 God, yet that, as such relation did not exist before marriage, it ceases when tho 
 marriage is dissolved by death, and, consequently, that the widower is at 111- 
 erty to marry his first wife's sister as being altogether a stranger. " Mr. Hat- 
 chard," says Dr. Pusey (Preface, p. Ixxxiii.), " probably did not obsorve that 
 bis argumint applies equally to the wife's mother or daughteh" 
 
 vl 
 
21 
 
 laws" forl.M a man to marry pitlnM- hh will's sist.M- uv h.8 w.U- :J 
 nicM-e. En.-h ..ftlus.' wouM i>e .vilj.nt ..a.-l. mi-ht h..oxcTr.l.-a 
 i„ ovil There would he no fm-tlu-r limit, as lar as principle is 
 ,„„,,,,uMl, in n.jrar.l to any oth.r case oi' njlinin, : 'Mm\ tx^ Uy 
 rons<nn.,,unil>,, tl.e-e is little proun.l <A' hope that, theneetorth 
 men wouhU.-anl it as a limit be vm.l which the.r eye o.;:ht 
 not to .va.uler The law of Clod, which was the satest toun.la- 
 tion for the restriction in cases of o//«n'V.v having Ih'^'i al.an- 
 doned, the only safe foundation for the restriction m eases o 
 consm.gnl.dty is undernuned. Ami the example ot others wdl 
 seduce many. It is not the least painful part of tlm c^anuna- 
 tion condm-ted l.v the Commissioners, that rderenee so tre(iuent 
 is made, both in 'the cpieslions and in the answers, to the (.pin- 
 ,ons of men, ami reference so scanty to the will ot (u.l, us 
 determining the iltnesB or unfitness of the ^^^^^^^^'^^'^ 
 formed the subje.-t of the inniiiry. Thus, (Evidence, p. 13) wo 
 f.od the Commissioners asking-" Are persons who have con- 
 tracted su(d. marriages looked do.vn upon by their Inends and 
 associates V" an.l we fn.d in the answers-" Quite tne couti ary 
 -held in the highest regard-full knowledge an.l approval ot 
 all her relations-sp.ak of them with the greatest regard. 
 Almost all the parties, indeed, to whose marriages the witnesses 
 refer, are what they call "respectable." One ot them gravely 
 a.lopts the celebrated reply .f a witness in the tamcu. Iburtcll 
 case of nmnler-who had described one of the parties as « 
 respectable man: -"Witness," said the Court, " what do you 
 J,n by respectable V" "I mean, my Lord, that he keeps a 
 ,r\cr " So :Mr. Thornburn describes the hero of one of his eases : 
 r^tm^ who keeps his cnrrior. . . . llo h much respected ; and 
 thougli he is living In open concubinage, his neighucrs sympa- 
 thize with him." 
 
 We dread the contagion of this morbid sympathy-wc dread 
 the dr^^-ndit .n.nerus. " The respectable man;' w1k> keeps his 
 In-: will infect the man who keeps his gig; the two will 
 corrupt the shopkeeper and the farn)er, and the practice ot 
 Ise will aesceildto'the lowest; so long as all, I,' uplu^dmg 
 each other, can prevent the occurrence-which -a Scotland ami 
 
o.) 
 
 in Ii-c-land still is happily fbuiul— of a ijublic disapprobation, 
 equal in force to law, even if law had been wanting, against the 
 the unsanctified alliance. 
 
 ^ Bnt "the plagne is begun," and the evil is already gone 
 forth. Legislation, indeed, will make it worse, since the nation 
 as a nation will then be committed to the sin. But even the 
 popidar discussion of the sul)iect, however inevitable, on the 
 right side, when the agitation has been urged on by our oppo- 
 nents, is itself an almost incalculable mis- 'lief. ' Thoughts, 
 which never would have occun-ed to the pure, have been forced 
 on the purest — a relationship which had given a mother to 
 orphans, while it still gave a sister to the widower— is hazarded, 
 if not broken up ; and hundreds, who have looked on each 
 other with the feelings of a blood-relationship, are even now 
 compelled to thiidc that the protection, which saved them from 
 even a doubt or a thought in each other's minds, will no longer 
 save them from suspicion; and the children, the objects of their 
 jOHit care, nuist be abandoned, since some loud and interested 
 elamourers have declai-ed that sisters of a wife deceased are to 
 the widower no more than any other marriageable woman ; and 
 their own delicacy Avill then prompt them to withdraw from a 
 position which no other marriageable woman could fill. 
 
 The Commissioners thought fit to ad<lress to the Lord Primate 
 of all L-eland a communication rcMpiesting his Grace to ascer- 
 tain the opinions of the clei-gy of Ireland on ilie subject of Mar- 
 riages within the Proliibited Degrees. Why did not they 
 address a siuiilar communication to the Lord Primate of all 
 England? I'erhaps the reply which they received from the 
 Archbishop of Annagh and the other prelates of Ireland did 
 not encourage them to prosecute their inquiries. The words of 
 the first noble and venerable man are as follows :— " My opin- 
 ion is decidedly o])posed to a removal of the prohibition Avhich 
 ]»revents a man from marrying his wife's sister. There are, I 
 believe, but very few cases of such marriages among i)ersons of 
 the higher ranks of society 5n this countiy ; and amojig th<> 
 lower orders, I understand, nuirriages of tiiis kind are regarded 
 with great dislike." 
 
23 
 
 v( 
 
 The Bishop of Mcath, speakinjj of public opinion in Irclanrl 
 on this subject, says. p. 156—" Such marriajics have l)cen held 
 in much greater abhorrence than in Kngland. I knoAv of only 
 three or lour in my long life ; and the coui)les so united were 
 ^ut oil from all society, and even from the ac(iuaintance of their 
 nearest relations." If the Commissioners had desired to have 
 the opinions of the clergy of England, their course was clear- 
 namely, to submit to the Archbishops of Canterbury and of 
 York a retiuest that their Graces would in their respective pro- 
 vinces obtain through the several dioscesans the returns of the 
 archdeaconries or rural deaneries, respectively, on the two 
 ipiestions of opinion and of fact. The ophvoiis so collected 
 would, we think, have shown a vast preponderance against 
 altering the existing law. Thii facts, w- also think, would have 
 shown Uiat the existing law is violated far less freciuently than 
 has been assumed. 
 
 We have ourselves taken town parishes and country par- 
 ishes: in four agricidtural i>arishes there has been no remem- 
 bered instance of a widower marrying his late wife's sister; in 
 another, only one in seventeen years. The Rev J. E. Tyler, 
 having '-made careful incpiiries in his parish of St. Gdes," 
 savs— " I have not known one in my parish since I became 
 rector in 1826." (Ans. 1212, p. 108.) Another London cler- 
 gyman, from whom we have seen a return, maintains that the 
 feelings of the poor, and the habits of the poor, and the silence 
 of the r>oor in respect to any grievance arising from the present 
 law, rdlcomur in proving that, speaking generally, they seek 
 no change. 
 
 That it is not a i)Oor man's rpiestiou is clear from the fact 
 (App. p. 140), that of the 1048 marriages enumerated by Mr. 
 Crowder, 4 only are in the class of laborers and mechanics.— 
 Of the twelve thousand widowers who marry spinsters, how 
 many have infant children requiring care -and is that care 
 never to be found in the widower's own mother, or in the wid- 
 ower's own sisters ?— is he never to obtain help from his own 
 aunt, or from his wife's aunt ?— and must he see his children 
 orphanlcss, unless ho can prevail on their mother's own sister to 
 
24 
 
 violate alike the law of the Bible and the law of the land, and 
 become their stepmother, and the only wife whom he ean find ? 
 
 Butwithont referring to marriaires, the ban^ existence of any 
 female relation on the husband's side as the protectress of hfs 
 children seems never to have occurred as a possibility even to 
 the wild imagination of the witnesses before the Commission : 
 nor is it ever stated by any one of them tliat his own sisters had 
 ever been or could ever be as mothers to his children. 
 
 Relations more sacred than tliose of l)rother and sister are, 
 liowever, now at stake. iXdmitting that the alliance is not for' 
 bidden in very terms and sylla])les, she says, for herself and her 
 sex :— " Where the command is not in express words, we bind 
 ourselyes by its spirit ; and on our humble and faithful obedi- 
 ence to its dictates we rest our hopes of future recompense, or 
 ground our fears of future retribution and ])nnishment" (ji. 4) ; 
 and she closes her appeal by earnestly imploring the House' 
 of Commons, as husbands, brothers, and fathers, " to remove 
 no safeguard to our virtue and our peace. If female purity 
 and innocence, domestic harmony and joy, be dear lo you— 
 we entreat your consideration and aid Tand beseech you, in the 
 eyes of your God and of your country, not, for the sake of iho 
 few whose motives cannot bear s.-ruliny, to sacrifice the well- 
 being— the happiness of the whole." 
 
I ? 
 
 ly 
 
 lis 
 to 
 
 id 
 
 1'- 
 
 d 
 
 i- 
 
 )r 
 
 ? 
 
 c 
 c 
 
 y 
 
 e 
 
 i