On this page
-
Text (4)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
^ . Monday , May 25 t 7 i . CONVICTION OF IXNOCBNT rEUSONS . Ix the House of Lords , Lord Camfbkll presented a petition pom . a large meeting in Mary lebone ,. pray ing that some remedy might be- devisect for ttoe- evil -which arises ; " when , notwithstanding the pure and generally satisfactory administration aE justfce , a prisoner is . convictec ^ , and afterwards proved to be altogether innocent . The petitioners observed that at present all that can be done is ft > r-the Crowa to gran * a pardon ; but they thought trhit a tribunal should be established by which the matter might be investigated , and the judgment reversed , and that the party unjustly convicted should receive some compensation for the injury inflicted on him .
THE OATHS BHX ,. The Earl of WrcKiiow pat a question to the Lord Chancellor connected with a petition presented by the latter on the previous Friday night . That petition was from a magistrate of the county of Hertford , -who complained that he was unable to execute the duties of his office because he could not take that part of the oath of allegiance which declares that " no foreign prince , prelate , state , or potentate , hath , or ought to have , any jurisdiction , power , or authority , ecclesiastical or spiritual , within this realm . " The question he asked was , whether
the Government could hold out any prospect that the Oaths Bill would be divested of that objectionable provision ; or whether it would be extended to all the members of her Majesty ' s Government who are required to take oaths , instead of being confined , as it now appears to be , to the members of the two Houses of Parliament ? —The Lord Chancellor said it was true that he had presented the petition which had been mentioned ; but he could not give any other information than this : that when the bill came up from the other House would be the proper time for any amendment to be proposed .
DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CA . USES BILL . Before the order of the day for going into committee on this bill was read , Lord Ltndkokst commented on the scandalous nature of actions for crim con . —actions which , excite the utmost surprise and indignation among foreigners , and which are peculiar to this country . He hoped that , as the bill passed through , the committee , a sufficient substitute would be provided for so disgraceful a species of action- A husband who could be satisfied for the destruction of his wife ' s honour by the payment of damages by the seducer deserves no redress whatever from a court of justice . Such actions are outrages on public decency ; and , as their most riltliy details are sent forth by the newspapers , the minds of many persona are corrupted . It was said that the ol > ject of the action is to prevent collusion ; but in truth it has no such effect . Their Lordships ought to put an end to so objectionable a state of things .
The House then went into committee , when the Duke of Norfolk moved that the bill be referred to a select committee for the purposes of taking evidence and resolving as to whether the permission for divorced persons to marry again has any warrant in Scripture . — The Bishop of St . David ' s thought the motion of the Duke of Norfolk did him infinite credit , but , as it could lead to no satisfactory result , ho ^ the Bishop of St . David ' s ) must oppose it . At the same time he regarded the bill with grave apprehension , for lie feared it would open the door to collusion , and would fail to satisfy the abstract principle on which it was founded . —The Earl of Hajrrowby admired the manliness of character which
had prompted the Duke of Norfolk to propose this amendment , but felt it his duty to oppose it . Neither the country nor the House would feel bound by the opinion of the proposed select committee . —Lord Rkdesdale and Lord Dunoannos expressed thoir intention of voting with the noble Duke . —The Duke of Argyll characterized the motion as nn attompt to get rid of the bill altogether . —Lord Denman created much laughter and led to many cries of "Order ! " by attempting to read from his hut a speech in support of the bill ; but ho w « s reminded by Lord Derby thut a diutinct regulation of the House forbids the reading of speeches . —Their Lordships then divided , when there appeared : — -
For the Duke of Norfolk ' s motion ... 2 G Against 123—97 The House then wont into committee , when clauses 1 to 5 inclusive wore agreed to without opposition . —Clause 0 , which specifies the tribunals to vliioh divorce casos should bo referred , was opposed by Earl Ckey on the ground that the timo of the judges -wlio are to constitute the highest court is ulroady fully oocupiod , and that the expense would place a separation out of tho reach of the poor . —Tho Lono Ciianobllok defended tho clause ,
which waa ultimately agreed to . On clause 15 , Lord St . Lkona . rds proposed an amendment to protect women who , having been deserted by thoir husbands , bocoino possessed of property . In such cases it oftou happonu that Iho husband stops in and claims tho property . — Tho Loiti > CirANCicuxm thought tho bill gave women in tb , i » position nurtlolont protoction .. —Aftor coiiHidorabla discussion , in which Lord Cabuwcll , Lord Djorjjy , and Lord Guanvillic oppoBcd tho amendment , and Karl Grey ana tho Bishop of Oxford supported It , tho Committoo divided , when tho numbers wore ; - —
Contents ... 52 ~ Non-contents ... t 44 . Majority __ On clause 16 , Lord Westmeath moved a clause precede it , giving powers of re-marriage in cases where the husband and wife have been separated for twent years and upwards . He then entered into the question of his own separation from his wife , and the attacks th t had been made on him , but was called to order bv Lo < i K-edesoalb and Lord Derby , who advised him to <] efe this vindication of his character to a more fittino- onnnr tunity . He accordingly withdrew his motion . On clause 10 , Lord Donoughmore proposed an amendment , placing married women in the same posi tion as their husbands with regard to divorce it vinculo matrimonii . — The Loud Chancellor opposed the amendment , which , though primu facie reasonable \ y practically inexpedient . —Lord Ly > -i ;> hurst declared his intention of supporting the amendment . —Lord Campbell thought the law ought not to be relaxed in thirespect . —The Committee then divided , when therr appeared : — For the amendment 20 Against 72 Majority —o'l Lord Lyndhurst then moved another amendment to the clause , to the effect that wilful and malicious deser - tion for five years should be a sufficient ground for dissolving a marriage . All the great authorities of the Church agree in this matter , an < 3 , by the existing law of Scotland , desertion for four years is sufficient to annul a marriage . —The Lord Chancellor opposed the amendment , as one which would lead to the greatest difficulties . —After some further discussion , their Lordships divided , when the numbers were : — Contents § Non-contents 97 Majority against the amendment —89 The remaining clauses down to clause 43 were then agreed to , after some discussion .
Clause 43 , giving parties liberty to re-marry , was opposed by the Bishop of Oxtorh , on the ground that the Scriptural argument against such re-raarri « ige . s is plain . He moved the omission of the clause . —Tlie Bishop of Bakgor dissented from the views expressed by the previous speaker . —Lord Campbell accused the Bishop of Oxford of ' quibbling , ' and affirmed that it would he changing the law of England if they dissolved marriages without letting the parties marry again . —This opinion was impugned by Lord Wensleydale , who . however , was reminded by the Lord Chancellor that , inasmuch as ju-icileffia are granted by that House , the Lord Chief Justice was right in what he had said . —The Earl of Derby recommended the Lord Primate that lie should
introduce into the clause itself his proposed amendment restricting the liberty of re-marriage of the party proceeding in the suit . That would be far more convenient than to grant the liberty generally , and then to restrict it by means of a proviso . — The Archbishop of Canterbury moved his amendment as suggested . —The Loud Chancellor did not think the amendment would prove conducive to morality . It might be a question whether they should allow the guilty paramours to marry each other ; but , surely , their Lordships would not prevent
even the guilty parties from marrying again at all ? ( Hear hear . ' ) They would not wi . sh to see a divoneil person living the rest of his days with a mistress : { Hear , hear . )—Earl Grey felt tho cogen . y of these arguments , but , on the other hand , he . was afraid that to pass the clause as it stood would open a most dangerous door . —Lord Campbell said he was impatient to have the action for criminal conversation abolished , but lie should not like to see it abolisheil without some substitute ; for otherwise there would bo a state of things which would operate as an encouragement to mlulU'rythat
The Committee then divided on tho question " the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause , " when there were—Contents ... ... " '' Non-contents ... . ¦•• Sl " , Majority ... ... " ~ ° Tho amendment whs accordingly ngroed to . On tho question that tho clauso , as amended , stnnu part of tho bill , tho Bishop of Oxford said that , although he thought tho clauso wnsgrontly improved oy tho amendment , ho considered thnt it wont bi \ vuniMv » iiu was right and expedient , and ho moved that it ut . omitted from tho bill . —Tho amendment was not prcMW
to a division . , 1 Lord Lyndhurst then proposed to strikoout tlio i \ oro ' unless , and tho remaining words of tho ohiuee no ¦«• to tho end . Tho clause would then hIihh ! In » "h 6 lnu ^ thus : — - " That no action for criminal conversation m . » hereafter bo brought . " Tho bill us it stood mn . lo in law in roforonco to that subject woroo than it i » ¦« ' sent . To provide that no aotlim foi- criminal cuiivoix should bo brought ; till ft divorce had been obUliJ would prevent ft Roman Catholic , who cannot » m a divorce , from bringing an notion . ir . iueoii After a llttlo desultory conversation , tho !"" ., tho motion of Lord Campboll , reounml , and Iiiiiiu < " « " i nftorwnrda adjourned till Thursday .
customs . . u In tho Houhic of Commonb , Mr . KwAicr , reft- » a return from which it appeared that 11 tho w »» customs duties there aro 00 articles onch proilucwtf
Untitled Article
supporting the Minister , have deferred until next year all the other duties of the Commons . The death of Mr . Hall occasions a vacancy in the representation of Leeds , and the constituency is busy looking out for the best candidate . To us it appears that there arc only two considerations which should have paramount -weight in . soc& a case . A constituency lifee Leeds should either select some man from its own part of the countey who can repr-esent manufacturing Yorkshire im &
manner equal to the intellect , energy , and opinion of the district , or it should . c&oose a man oa national grounds . Richard Cobden is without a seat . And there is a gentleman , resident not far from Leeds , who has long been considered the best man to represent manufacturing : Yorkshire in the House of Commons , —an accomplished scholar , who understands public affairs and commerce . That man is William Edward Fobster .
Among the announcements of the week is one of much interest and promise ; an educational conference is to be held in " Willis ' Rooms for three days , commencing on the 22 nd . June , iu order to consider the reasons why the working classes withdraw their children prematurely from school , and the expedients by which that great obstruction to popular education can be overcome . Prince Albert will preside . There are some reasons for apprehending that among the promoters of the meeting are those who desire to make it simply the instrument for extending the operations for the
Department of Science and Art at South Kensington ; for , simultaneously with the conference , an educational museum is to ' be opened , and an exhibition . of maps , globes , instruction books , paint-boxes , and other instruments of study . But there are others who have most deeply at heart the proposed object of the meeting , such as the Rev . Mr . Rogers , of Golden-lane , Canon Moseley , of Bristol , and many gentlemen , who have exerted themselves to promote education amongst the very poorest , and have
encountered the obstacle practically , lhe debate , at all events , will throw some light upon the subject . The Neufchatel business is settled , after all , without much more than squabbling on paper ; the Kmg is allowed to . retain his title of 'Prince , ' though he gives up the sovereignty ; a mistake , we think , since history gives us many cases in which a titular claim has been made the handle for reviving a more substantial claim . Although we have no new event in France , rather
an interesting correspondence has thrown a stronger light up on the commercial state of that country . Letters in the Times and Globe had noticed the failure of M . Charles Tiitjrneyssen , connecting the name with that of M . Pereire , of the Credit Mobilier ; M . Pebeire has replied to both journals in a letter denying any connexion between his family and that of M . THUBNEYSSEN , and any connexion between the defaulter and the Credit Mobilier ; and he says that the failure has been ' exaggerated . ' In this very interesting letter , however , lie states that a cousin of M . Tiiuuneyssen married a niece of M . Peretre ; that he , Pereire , is a creditor of Cbtarxes Thurneyssen , on account of a loan of 20 , 000 / . which the great capitalist made to the young man , three and a half years ago , to extricate
him from land speculations ; that two other creditors—he makes no mention of the Poles and private persons who have been victimised — arc M . George Tiitjrneyssen , a well-known capitalist , and M . Auguste Thurneyssen , the head of that monetary family , who was a partner in . tho Russian house of Stieg ' utz . And strange to say , although this failure has been ' exaggerated , ' it has , says M . Isaac Pereire , ' largely diminished' tho fortune of the affluent Auguste Tiitjrneyssen . M . Pe-WETRR ' a letter is a valuable contribution to the history of these matters ; while it shows how considerablo an effect the English press has , even in a country whore tho national press is in fetters .
Untitled Article
506 TJH ^ E LEADER . [ No . 375 , Saturday ,
Untitled Article
Tint Cape op Good Horn . —By the ship Sutlej , Captain James , which anived on Monday from Calcutta , Capo Town papwa to tho 28 th of March havo boon received in , London . Tho posturo of affairs on tlio eastern frontier had not changed . Tho Governor liad thought it bettor to prolong hia stay in that quarter , on account of tho unsettled state of affairs and tho doubtful disposition of tho Kaffirs ; ho had , thoroforo , again prorogued the Parliament to April tho 7 th . His Excellency wan transporting into tho interior Kaffirs convicted either of stealing oattlo ov of prowling in tbo colony without passes . Tho wine-growers in the colony aro Cull of activity and hopo . Mr . Keating has boon appointed to tho Solicitor-G-onoralehlp .
Untitled Article
IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT .
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), May 30, 1857, page 506, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2195/page/2/
-