CUMBERLAND-L Archives

Archiver > CUMBERLAND > 2003-12 > 1071692392


From: "Barb Baker" <>
Subject: [CUL] WCT, Wednesday, May 29, 1895
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 15:19:52 -0500


YESTERDAY'S PARLIAMENT

-----------------
HOUSE OF LORDS

The House met at 5-30.

DIVORCE AND RE-MARRIAGE

Lord Halifax moved the second reading of the Divorce Amendment Bill, and stated that it in no way affected the facilities for divorce given by the Divorce Acts, its object being merely to relieve the clergy from an obligation imposed upon them by that Act with reference to the marriage of persons who had been divorced and to relieve the Church of England from an occasional great scandal. The Divorce Act gave the right to a strange clergyman to intrude in a church or chapel, against the will of the incumbent and of the parishioners in order to solemise the marriage of a divorced person, and the Bill proposed that no minister of the church should be liable to pay penalty or censure for refusing to permit such a marriage in his church or to allow a proclamation of the banns of marriage there.

The Archbishop of Canterbury very earnestly supported the second reading, mainly on behalf of the feelings of parishioners.

Lord Grimthorpe did not look with much favour on a measure which owed its origin to a disturbance created by the English Church Union, and which would place the parishioners at the mercy of the clergy.

The Marquis of Salisbury thought that in the interest of the church and of the country the Bill should be read a second time. He did not, however, altogether like its machinery, and was of opinion that it would be better to leave to the bishop rather than to the incumbent to determine whether the church should be used for the marriage of a divorced person.

The Lord Chancellor thought it impossible not to feel sympathy with the general object of the noble viscount who introduced the bill, but it was a matter of grave importance to leave the incumbent or even the bishop to determine whether these marriages should be permitted in a parish church. He doubted whether the grievance was as great as had been represented, and he should have been better satisfied if this Bill had had some other origin than a disturbance in connection with a particular marriage.

The Bishop of London defended and Earl Cowper criticised the Bill, which was read a second time without a division.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

PROTECTION OF WILD BIRDS

The Wild Birds Protection Acts (amendment) Bill was read a third time and passed and their Lordships rose at five minutes to seven o'clock.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]
to be continued....................

Barb, Ontario, Canada.

This thread: