such infamous marriages happen, especially with respect to those that are under age? And as to those of full age, if they cannot marry clandestinely, there is nothing in this Bill that can prevent their contracting such a marriage in a regular manner by licence; for the ecclesiastical officer never does, nor indeed can refuse to grant a licence upon demand, if affidavit be made, that the parties are of full age, and that there is no legal objection to their being married, which the reputation of a man being a rogue, or a woman being a prostitute, is not. I cannot therefore think, that we ought to add to the size of our statute book, already too voluminous, by making a new law for preventing what can but very rarely happen; and much less do I think, that we should for this purpose run the risk of introducing one of the greatest misfortunes that can happen to society; and that this will be the case I shall endeavour to demonstrate, when I come to consider the consequences of the Bill now under our consideration; but in pursuance of the method I have laid down, must first consider the design of the Bill. As the foundation of the Bill, Sir, is threefold, so the design must of course be threefold, that is to say, to prevent polygamy: to render the proof of marriage more certain and easy, in order to prevent disputes about the legitimacy or illegitimacy of children; and to prevent clandestine marriages. As to the first, this Bill will be so far from answering the design, that, in my opinion, it will render polygamy much more frequent than it is at present; for it prescribes so many formalities for rendering a marriage good and valid in law, that a cunning fellow will always take care to have some of them omitted, by which means he will prevent its being in the power of the law to convict him, or to subject him to any punishment; and as has been already observed, every rakish young fellow may marry several times before he comes of age, without being in the least danger of punishment, or of being made to suffer either in purse or person; for though a young woman might, perhaps, have an action and recover damages against a man of full age, who, under a promise of marriage, or under pretence of a sham marriage, debauched her, yet if he was under age when he did so, she could recover no damages, for he could certainly plead his non-age to any such action; and even supposing a man to be of full age when he was guilty

of such a villainous imposition upon an ignorant love-sick maiden, as there can be no adequate recompence for the loss of a man's honour or a woman's virtue, an action of damages would be but an uncom fortable relief for a woman of any character; nay, if the affair had been kept but tolerably secret, she would rather submit patiently to the indignity, than seek for reparation in such a public and mercenary way. This men will be but too apt to trust to, and therefore, I am persuaded, that a few years hence many a young woman will be debauched under the pretence of a sham-marriage, or a written promise of marriage; for though those of the present generation may remember something of the law, and be a little cautious, yet the young women of the next will be as ignorant and as regardless of it, as they now are of our laws against wearing cambrics.

Thus, Sir, it is evident, I think, that this Bill will rather defeat than answer what I have stated as the first design of it, and which, in my opinion, is the most laudable design, the most desirable end. And as to the proof of marriage, how far the register by this Bill to be established will answer this purpose, I shall not at present pretend to form any certain judgment; but this I am sure of, that so far as relates to this register, the Bill is entirely a new Bill; and I must be of opinion, that such an important regulation, a regulation upon which the legitimacy of all the children of the next generation will depend, ought not to be thus passed per saltum, as it will be if the present question be determined in the affirmative. I think, we ought to take a little more time to consider of it: nay, I think, we ought to leave it for one summer at least to be considered of by our constituents; especially as we find, that some of the lawyers amongst us are in a doubt, whether this register, though kept in the most formal and regular manner, will be a full proof of the validity of any marriage therein entered. For my own part, as it is not declared in any part of the Bill, that such register book shall be a proof, or even a presumption of the truth of every entry made therein, I am very much afraid, that our courts below will require some further proof, that all the solemnities required by this Bill were duly observed; and if they do, it will render the proof of marriage more difficult and uncertain than it is by the present practice.

Even as to the register itself, Sir, I am afraid, that our incumbents will be often under great difficulties about making the entry, when the parties happen to live in parishes remote from each other, which is very often the case in the country: for if they are married by proclamation of banns, how shall the incumbent of the church where they come to be married know, that the banns were regularly proclaimed in the church of the parish where the other party resides, and where he has not, perhaps, any friend or acquaintance? They may bring him a false certificate; and if he upon the faith of it enters the marriage in his register, he may afterwards find himself indicted, and must run the risk of being condemned to be hanged for having made a false entry in his register; for what will not a lover do to obtain a beautiful young lady of a great fortune? What will not a revengeful father do, when he finds, that his daughter was married at a church 100 miles off, and an entry made in the register, as if she had been married by proclamation of banns in his parish church, though none such were ever proclaimed; again, if the marriage is to be by licence, the incumbent may know, that the party who resides in his parish is of age, or that the parents have consented: but how shall he be certainly informed of this, as to the other party, who resides, perhaps, in a very distant parish? In short, Sir, if I were an incumbent of a parish, I would not, after this Bill takes place, perform the ceremony of marriage between any two persons whatever, unless I personally knew, not only both the parties, but the relations of both the parties; and what an inconvenience this may be I leave to gentlemen to consider.

Now, Sir, with regard to the third design of this Bill, I shall grant that, I believe it will be effectual for preventing any future marriage without a proclamation of banns or a licence; but if a proper register of marriages were established, I can see no necessity either for a licence, or a proclamation of banns; and as it now seems to be the unanimous opinion of this House, that such a register ought to be appointed, there is not so much as a shadow of reason for carrying this third design into execution, bat a great many strong reasons against it. Clandestine marriages, or what I shall now call, marriages without the consent of parents or relations, may affect the pride or the avarice of the rich; but I have shewn that every kind of such mar

riages, except one, are rather a public benefit than a public evil; therefore in so far, they ought not to be prevented by a public law; and as to the only one that can any way be called a public evil, those of this sort so rarely happen, that they do not deserve to be taken any notice of by the legislature, especially as they generally proceed from some neglect or wrong conduct in the parents, with regard to the care and education of their children. But even supposing that such marriages happened much oftener than they do, is it possible by laws to prevent all the misfortunes that are brought upon individuals by misconduct? Would you prevent such misfortunes by bringing a misfortune upon the society itself? Because some men waste their substance and ruin their families by their extravagance, would you therefore put it out of the power of any man to dispose of his estate? Because some men make very whimsical, and really very unjust wills, would you therefore put it out of the power of any man to dispose of his property by will? And because some people rashly contract infamous marriages; will you therefore put marriage under such regulations as will in a great measure prevent it, amongst the most numerous and most useful part of your people?

This, Sir, leads me to the last head I proposed, which was to consider the consequences of the Bill now under our consideration; and upon this subject I must say, I was surprised to hear the hon. gentleman who spoke last draw any argument in favour of this Bill from the laws of Holland; for the people of this country are so very different from the people in the United Provinces, in their disposition, their temper, and their humour, that a regulation which in Holland has been found to contribute to the public good, may in this country be productive of the most fatal consequences; and besides, the form of government in the two countries, as well as the religion, is so very different, that no regulation in the one can ever be made a precedent for the other. In Holland not only every province but every town is a sort of sovereignty within itself; and their religion, especially with regard to marriage, is much the same as it was in this country in the days of Oliver Cromwell, when neither the marriage contract, nor the ceremony was supposed to have any sanctity or religion in its nature; which is a doctrine that, I hope, will never

the sake of preventing that sort of clandestine marriages which happen so rarely, and which may more effectually be prevented by a due care and a proper education of children. There must be some latent design, and that can only be a design to secure all the heiresses of the kingdom to the eldest sons of noble and rich families, in order thereby to establish that sort of aristocratical government, which, from the Conquest to the reign of Henry 7, was the plague of this country, and so often involved us in bloody civil wars; for I look upon this Bill only as the prelude to another Bill for restoring the old law of intails, as a much stronger argument may be drawn for the latter, from the misfortunes of families by the extravagance of an ancestor, than ever can be drawn for the former, from the misfortunes of families by the clandestine marriage of a son or daughter. Sir, if this Bill could any way contribute to secure all our rich heiresses to the eldest sons of noble reduced families, the argument might have some weight; but as a rich noble lord is as fond of having his eldest son married to a rich heiress as any poor lord can be, and as an avaricious father always will, and the court of Chancery, or a guardian always must prefer the former, the Bill will have a quite contrary effect. The poor nobility will become, as they are in Poland, attendants only upon the rich, and will serve to increase their power to transgress the laws and disturb the peace of their country.

I hope no gentleman will from any thing I have said suppose, that I am for encouraging children to be undutiful to thei: parents. I think children are in duty bound to consult their parents upon all occasions of importance, especially in that of their marriage, and even to curb their inclinations, if possible, when they find them disagreeable to their parents. But the duty is reciprocal: there is a duty owing by parents to their children, as well as by children to their parents; and an exact and affectionate performance of that duty on the side of the parent is the best way to secure it on the part of the child. If you establish a tyrannical power in the father, as you propose to do by this Bill, you will make many fathers forget that duty they owe to their children, and the consequence will be a neglect of duty on the other side, as soon as it is in their power. Therefore, to the many arguments I have before used, I must add

this, that for preserving the duty of children to their parents, I must be against passing this Bill into a law, and consequently must give my negative to the question.

The Earl of Hillsborough :

Sir; I am very sensible of the danger I am in, when I rise up to speak after the hon. gentleman who spoke last: his manner of speaking is so engaging, there is such music in his voice, that it pleases the ear, though it does not inform the understanding: at the same time he expresses his sentiments in such beautiful terms, is so ingenious in finding out arguments for supporting his opinion, and states those arguments in so strong a light, that he is always most deservedly heard with attention, and even with a sort of prejudice in favour of every thing he says. But yet I am so fully convinced of his having upon this occasion adopted the wrong side of the question, that, I think I may venture to shew the impropriety of most of his arguments; and indeed, there was not, in my opinion, one argument he made use of against this Bill, but what militates as strongly against every law now subsisting for preventing clandestine marriages; therefore, if I thought there was any weight in those arguments, I should move for leave to bring in a Bill for repealing all the penal laws we have against such marriages, in order to leave every boy of 14, and every girl of 12, at full liberty to. run to the next marriage shop, (for I suppose we should soon have one in every street) and be married when, and to whom any sudden start of fancy should direct them.

But, Sir, I have always thought marriage a very serious affair, therefore, I think, it ought to be gone about with discretion, with deliberation, and even with a religious awe and reverence. A mutual love between the two parties contracting marriage, is, I shall grant, a very proper ingredient; but then it ought to be a sedate and fixed love, and not a sudden flasli of passion which dazzles the understanding, but is in a moment extinguished: the happiness of a marriage founded upon such love can never be lasting, and accordingly we find from experience that it seldom proves so. Therefore our religion as well as our laws have very wisely provided, that no such marriages shall ever be contracted; and when the mutual love is fixed upon a solid foundation, that is to