■ » 









.< ;,' ■ 



July 13j 



1 — rrili^ od their friends in the House of Commons to 

 *° ;.?!htl Renewal of the Party Processions Act, as being 

 oppose «• oduce the effect intended by its enactment, 



■^ .how the Orangemen of the north that the mem- 

 Ei of that Association were averse from any attempt to 

 JnrtaU what the Orangemen conceived to be their privileges. 

 Skilled on Orangemen to reciprocate, and to join the 

 4«ociation in their efforts to oppose, not only Proces- 

 inn« Acts but every piece of legislation calculated to 

 AAAtt the liberties of their common country. The 

 motion was seconded by Copt. Seaver of Newry, and 

 Tooted Mr- D - O'Connell, jun., gave his usual weekly 

 .ccount'from the prison, and he had again to announce 

 that his father and felloe-prisoners were in the highest 

 l Mlth and spirits. Indeed their health appeared to lm- 

 nV the longer they were confined. His father wished 

 [° J eipress to them his delight at the peaceable con- 

 duct o( the people, and now that there was no danger of 

 n breach of the peace he had nothing more to say to 

 them than persevere, persevere. They were advancing 

 nearer to Repeal every day, for England would soon 

 rant them, unless they wished to see France take pos- 

 < ion of Morocco. When Irishmen were not wanted 

 ■r were insulted and trampled on, but when their ser- 

 vires were required they were addressed as " Good brave 

 Put vou are fond of fightiDg for fighting sake, and you 

 r.iu*t "become again what you have ever been— the right 

 arm of our power.' Would they grant that request if 

 ask them ? (Cries of " Never.") Yes they would, 

 but they should first get a little bribe in the shape of a 

 domestic Legislature. They would then have something 

 woith fighting for ; but now they got all the kicks, while 

 England pocketed the halfpence. The amount of rent 

 was 2136/. 



jjttfecellaneous. 



Pilgrimage to the Tomb of John Ray. — The Chelms- 

 ford Chronicle of Friday last contains an interesting 

 account of a pilgrimage made on Wednesday, the 3d 

 inst., to the tomb of John Ray, the naturalist, at Black 

 Not ley, Essex, by the President and several Fellows of 

 the Linnean Society. We regret that we have cot room 

 for the detailed account of the visit, but the following 

 extracts will interest many of our readers. The party 

 left town by the first railway train on Wednesday for 

 Witham, consisting of the Bishop of Norwich, presiJent 

 of the Linnean Society ; Professor Bell, of King's Col- 

 lege ; Professor Forbes, of King's College ; Professor 

 Ansted, of King's College ; Robert Brown, Esq., 

 F.R.S. ; Edward Forster, Esq., F.L.S. ; J. J. Bennett, 

 Esq., F.L.S. ; R. Kippist, Esq., F.L.S. ; Dr. Lankester, 

 F.L.S. ; C. Harrison, Esq. (Private Secretary to Sir R. 

 Peel); Richard Taylor, Efq'., F.L.S.; J. E. Winter- 

 bottom, Esq., F.L.S., M.A. ; R. H. Solly, Esq. ; W. 

 Varrell, Esq., F.L.S. ; A. White, Esq., F.L.S. ; Joshua 

 Milue, Esq., and J. Van Voorst, Esq. At Witham the 

 party were joined by J. H. Paltisson, Esq., who being 

 the proprietor of the house in which Ray spent his last 

 days, invited these gentlemen to take luncheon beneath 

 its roof. They were also joined by Thomas Luard, Esq., 

 J. V,\ Tomkin, Esq., and by three gentlemen from Saf- 

 fron Walden, Thomas Spurgin, Esq., and Joseph and 

 J :a Clark, Esqrs., the latter of whom, in conjunction 

 with Mr. G. S. Gibson, has published in the pages of the 

 1 Ph) tologist" an account of a pleasing botanical trip to 

 the same spot. Mrs. Pattisson and the Misses Luard 

 were also present. Proceeding in carriages to Black 

 Nolley, about six miles distant from Witham, the party 

 reached the village church about 12 o'clock. This edifice 

 is an old plain tiled building, with rather a picturesque 

 wooden spire, and stands in a delightfully rural situation. 

 On the south side of the church rest the mortal remains 

 of one of the greatest of British naturalists. The tomb 

 » of a pyramidal form, from 10 to 12 feet high, and is 

 ascribed with an elegant Latin epitaph from the pen of 

 the Rev. W. Coyte, M.A. It is in good preservation, 

 out the inscription is rather illegible, and we under- 

 stand tnat the Linnean Society intend to restore that 

 portion of it ; and thus, like Old Mortality with his 

 1'ious chisel, preserve it for future enthusiastic in- 

 quirers after the " lettered stone." This monument 

 was of course the chief object of interest and attraction, 

 and many lingered for a considerable time round it, several 

 copying the inscription while Professor Forbes took a clever 

 sketch of the scene. Many of the party visited the in- 



Smn i I Church ia which R,, y had been baptised— 

 rambled about the village— or culled botanical specimens 



*i & ° a PPropriate memento of their visit. The Bishop 

 tofn k a PPeared to take especial interest in the 



■j*ne, but was obliged to leave early, and after visiting 

 triit "t nce ' and P artak ing of Mr. Pattisson's hospi- 

 Lond P roceed ed to Witham to take the train to 

 Dewk^ ^ bout one o'clock the party assembled at 



its final tv k - h ° USe from wbich Ra j' s » iure s P irit took 

 bv Mr \xri ln 1705 * lt is now a farm-house, occupied 



Hon nrn • l ? IDg * Her6 lhe J B&t d ° Wn t0 * C ° ld C ° Ua " 



gentJem by Mr * Pattisson t and at which that worthy 



pos»d th\ 8 u hi8 lad y Presided. Mr. Pattisson pro- 

 Ray wl L y should drink t0 the memory of John 

 then nr *! as done in reverential silence. Mr. Forster 

 *anv h PO b the heaIth of Mr « and Mrs - Pattisson, with 



alluded t ♦£ t0 them for their kind hospit ,lity * He 

 Perienced ► i- P leasure and satisfaction which he ex- 



^ don* Vu V s P resent visit » entertaining, as he always 

 scientific , h, 6 h "t veneration for John Rav,bofh as a 

 better L * m ° ral charactcr - He said he could not 



Peatina »k eSS i. hU view of Ra y' a character than by re- 

 ▼ersarv of £ had rema ' ked of him at the last anni- 

 w »th Bino • Lmncan Society— that he possessed piety 

 «centy ^ a d without cant, and morality with con- 



THE NEWSPAPER. 



[1844. 



sistency. When at Cambridge such was his goodness of 

 disposition that he gained the respect of all parties. 

 Several other toasts followed, including that of the 

 Bishop of Norwich, as President of the Society. On 

 their return to Witham the visitors and their friends sat 

 down to dinner at the White Hart Inn, Edward Forster, 

 Esq., V.P.L.S., in the chair, R. Taylor, Esq., 'acting as 

 Vice-President ; and after dinner returned to town by 

 railway. We must not omit to mention that the party 

 assembled at Dewlands, before they separated, recorded 

 their signatures in a work belonging to Mr. Pattisson, 

 u Derham's Life and Remains of Ray," which will 

 doubtless be treasured by that gentleman as an interesting 

 memento of the visit. 



Piracy and Murder. — Accounts have been received by 

 the Caledonia steamship from Halifax of the wreck and 

 piracy of the barque Saladin, under very horrible circum- 

 stances. It appears that the Saladin, bound to London 

 from Valparaiso, had been run on Bhore and wrecked near 

 Country Harbour, on the coast of Halifax, under circum- 

 stances that gave strong grounds for suspicion that an act 

 of piracy had been committed ; and Admiral Sir C. Adam 

 at once sent one of her Majesty's ships to take possession 

 of the wreck, and apprehend the crew. The Admiral in 

 his report states that " upon the examination of the 

 prisoners (six in number), it was apparent that there 

 were the strongest grounds of suspicion, and they have 

 all since confessed that at the instigation of a man 

 named Fielding, who was formerly master of a ship 

 which had been seized at Valparaiso, and who was a 

 passenger on board, the master, two mates, and 

 three others of the crew were murdered. That Fieldia 

 and his son, a boy of 15, were afterwards put to death, 

 in consequence of an attempt on his part to get rid of 

 two men who had been the principal actors in the murder 

 of the master and others, and that the ship was run o.i 

 shore as already mentioned. It is intended to admit two 

 of the six men who were not all engaged in the murder 

 of the master and crew as witnesses, and bring the other 

 four prisoners to trial." The confession of one of the 

 crew details the whole proceeding at great length ; but 

 all the principal facts are given in the above extract from 

 Sir C. Adam's letter. The vessel had on board a valu- 

 able cargo of copper in bars, 13 bars of silver, 10,000 

 dollars, and a quantity of guano. 



The New Comet. — M. Arago announced, on Monday 

 last, to the Academy of Sciences, that M. Mauvais had 

 discovered in the constellation of Hercules a nebulosity 

 which he suspected to be a comet. The observations 

 made on Monday night fully confirmed that supposition, 

 and the new comet had already been seen in two dif- 

 ferent positions. Its apparent position at midnight, at 

 Paris, on the 9th inst., was A.R.=21G° 47' 8".6 and 

 Dec.=r45° 55' 59".4 ; with a daily motion in A.R. of 

 1° 34' 31", and in Dec. of 0° 25' V. 



Horsic of Lords.— The Stisscx Peerage— A Committee for 

 Privileges assembled on Tuesday to hear the opinions of the 

 Judges on the claim of Sir Augustus d'fiste to the Peerage.— 

 Lord Chief Justice Tindal said: My Lords, the question pro- 

 posed by your Lordships to her Majesty's Judges is :— Evi- 

 dence was given of a marriage in Rome in the year 1793, per- 

 formed by an English priest, according to the rites of the Church 

 of England, between A B, a son of George III., and C D, an 

 English subject, without the previous consent of his Majesty. 

 Assuming such marriage to be sufficiently established so as to be 

 a valid marriage, but for the provisions of the Royal Marriage 

 Act, would it, notwithstanding this act, be sufficient in a suit 

 bv the son of A B to recover an estate in England as heir to his 

 father >" In answer to that question, I have been requested by 

 my brethren to inform your Lordships that it is the unanimous 

 opinion of all the Judges that, assuming the evidence offered 

 of a marriage solemnised at Rome in 1793, according to the 

 rites of the Church of England, between a son of the late 

 King and another British subject, without the previous consent 

 of the King, it is not sufficient, having regard to that statute, to 

 establish a valid marriage between those persons m a suit in 

 which the eldest son of that marriage claims an estate In 

 England by virtue of such marriage. The question turns upon 

 the statute, and is shortly this, whether, bearing In mind the 

 provisions of the statute, if a marriage should be contracted 

 within the realm of England, and would be on account of such 

 statute null and void to all intents and purposes, such statute 

 would have the effect of annulling such marriage wlnther cele- 

 brated within this realm or without. It is hardly necessary to 

 observe tha% as your Lordships' question states, A B was the 

 son of his late Majesty George III., and as the statute expressly 

 applies to the descendants of the body 1 f the late King George 

 1 1 not being the issue of a princess married to a foreign prince, 

 A B docs in our opinion, fall precisely within the class of persons 

 exores sly described in the statute, and therefore we must consider 

 him in the same situation as if the act had been passed with regard 

 to him individually. So that it seems to us as if it had been de- 

 clared by the statute that A B should not marry except under 

 certain circumstances ; and again, that the marriage of A B not 

 under those circumstances, that is, without the consent re- 

 qured by that statute to be obtained from the Crown, should 

 be nu:l and void to all intends and purposes. The rule of 

 construction with regard to all statutes is, that there should be 

 a construction according to the latent of the Parliament which 

 passed the act. If the words of a statute are unambiguous, 

 then we have nothing more to do than to take the words of the 

 statute themselves, and construe them according to their ordi- 

 nary and natural meaning. The words themselves declare tne 

 intention of the Legislature, but if doubt arises upon them, then 

 we must call iu aid the ground and circumstances of making 

 the statute, and have recourse to the preamble, which, *ccora- 

 inff to rules laid down both in Dyer and Plowden, is to be taKcn 

 an the key to open the minds of those who had made the i sta- 

 tute. Looking at all these means of interpretation, we in-iiu 

 that they all concur in affording the construction which we reei 

 bound to put upon this statute. But, in the first P la «' ** m "" 

 say that the words of the statute appear free from all »»■»»*""/; 

 The word, of the statute are general, that no P" 8 . "^*"" 

 described shall contract matrimony ; and, again, ti 'J « l "' tute 

 mouial contracts made against the provisions of that ^« 

 ..hall be null and void. The effect of the act '.* »<>t ^ |edW 



a„v particular country or district, but la *PJ U ^ /J*?"" fan 

 matrimonial in general, and in the abstract, and gtcl-rea an 



incapacity to contract attaching to the persoDOfAB J**™!™ 

 he goes. The incapacity to contract marriage at ^»V a c ™?> 

 wiaim the provisions of the act and is ^opposed l o «»• P[°^ 

 sions of the second section of the statute, which section aeoarcs 



that all marriages contracted hi contravention of the provisions 

 of the act shall be null and void. The words are general, or 

 more properly speaking, universal, and they cannot be satisfied 

 in any ordinary manner, unless they are held to apply to royal 

 marriages in every part of the world in which they may be con- 

 tracted. Tbe words of the second section throw light upon, 

 and confirm the interpretation given to the first section. [His 

 lordship read the second section of the act.] The words simply 

 in this section are the same as in the first; to contract marriage 

 generally is the matter spoken of, without reference to the 

 country in which that marriage is to be contracted. But as 

 there is no doubt that the marriage took place without the due 

 observance of the conditions imposed by the second section, 

 we think that that marriage, whether contracted in Rome 

 or in England, is a void contract. All the established 

 rules of construction require that the words of the first aud 

 second section shall be read together, and the marriage at Rome 

 will be valid under the second section of the statute, if it is not 

 prohibited under the first. It is not conceivable that the Le- 

 gislature should have interposed such machinery in order to 

 enable the parties to marry under the second section without 

 the consent to be obtained under the first, and should render 

 such a marriage valid under any given set of circumstances if 

 tbe party could have been able, by an easy journey, or by a 

 voyage of a few hours, to render useless all the prohibitions of 

 the first section of the statute. And it is not unw ijr of re- 

 mark that the exception from the prohibitory clause of the 

 sue of those princeMW who may marry into foreign families 

 affords some proof that marriage* abroad were not out of the 

 view of tbe Legislature at the time of the passing of the act. 

 Such marrisges might, and, in all probability, would he cele* 

 brated out of England, and yet the Leghdatnre thought of them 

 and made them the subject of a special pro* in. It was con- 

 tended at the bar, on the part «»f the claimant, that an act of 

 Parliament was n t generally of bin g force bej*ond the realm 

 of d ; that even if meant to be ao, it was not of force oa 



the subjects of foreign states. It is clear that that argument 

 is well founded; but it is equally clear that a statute will be of 

 pending: force on the subjects of this realm, both within and 

 without it, if the Legislature has the intention to make it so, 

 and clearly expresses such an intention. Indeed it was ad- 

 mitted by the counsel, in the course of argument, that if the 

 words "within or without the realm," or any words of equi- 

 pollent signification, had been Inserted in the statute, the right 

 to contract marrisge, except as permitted by the statute, would 

 have been taken away, and the marriage would have been null 

 and void to all intents and purposes. But if the words are 

 comprehensive enough to include all persons of a certain class, 

 within and without the realm , and if the same restraining 

 sense of these words In regard to a marriage had in England 

 clearly applies to a marriage had out of England, then it fol- 

 lows that the construction must be the same, whether these 

 words are in the statute or not. If the royal marriages could 

 be contracted in Scotland or Ireland, or on the Contn ', in- 

 dependently of this statute, then the statute would be virtually 

 and substantially a dead letter, and would have been so from 

 the day on which it was passed. We think rt is not so. The 

 object and purpose of the Legislature are clear, and the mis- 

 chief to be provided again**, and the means by which it i* 

 provided against, do not leave us a doubt upon this point. 

 The statute was founded on the policy and expediency of 

 not permitting marriages of the royal family which might 

 he detrimental to the state. Such is stated la ttie preamble 

 to be the object of the statu'.e. The marriages of the royal 

 family may be of the highest importance to t state. But 

 this object might be frustrated, and the mtaciucl .i tended 

 to be guarded against might be rendered remediless, if the same 

 marriages which, contracted within England, wou.d be null 

 and void to all intents and purp , could become good and 

 valid if they were contracted out of this country. It was then 

 argued that this statute was merely directory— that the provi- 

 sion in the first section as to the signifying the consent under 

 the great seal, and the entering it in the books ot the Privy 

 Council, showed it to be so, for that, as these provisions could 

 only be complied with in this country, so the prohibition to 

 marry, except under these conditions, must be confined to this 

 country only, and could not extend to foreign countries. But 

 the answer to that argument appears to a* to be satisfactory: 

 namelv, that the only words which in this section are required 

 to be complied with in order to render this marriage valid, are 

 those which require the consent to be given, and that the words 

 which follow are directory only, and not essential, and apply 

 to those cases alone in which they can be applied property— 

 namely, to marriages celebrated here ; for it would be impos- 

 sible to contend, that if the marriage of A B at Rome was bad, 

 with the previous consent of King George III., it would not 

 have been good and valid, though such consent could not have 

 been Mgnified nor registered at Rome in the manner provjded 

 for by the statute. It was further contended that as, .by the 

 3d section, all persons who assist at a marriage prohibited by 

 the act should incur a pramunire, and as there was no provi. 

 sion for the taking or punishing of such an offender when the 

 offence was committed out of the country, the necessary in- 

 ference was, that the prohibition did not extend tomarnagea 

 out of the realm of England. But we think that a mere s defi- 

 ciency in the statute, as to provision for the punishment of 

 offenders against it, is not sufficient to Jus if y us in holding ■ the 

 clear and express words of it to be useless J ^ inoperative. 

 We, therefore, think that the eldest son of A B, under the cir- 

 cumstance* stated in your lordships' qacst'on, <j™' d » ot »• ia J 

 tain the suit supposed, and make a good title to lands as heir to 

 his father—The Lord Chancellor: My ^^'^Si^iSJ 

 owe thanks to the learned judges for the care with « hl £'™„; 

 their other incessant and laborious occupations they ^ have 

 considered and answered the question ^pat by > our tortsmpe. 

 I have consulted with some other law lords and we turns: 

 that, under present circumstances, the deer ^ » ^ ir ' e c ° m 

 mittee had better be postponed -Lord Brougham . ^ pe^ 



fectly concur with my no°ie ana . l attention, 



our thanks to , to = learned judges <*** ^ ^ ^ 

 and particularly to tfic £or« t wnich we have j u8t 



heard W ?£^o™I£"Xw** ^too* to postpone 

 heard, l nave oui t expense to which 



Up nartv will be thereb, ? subjected. For myself, I am quite 

 eXo give my opinion J I do not doubt about the question -- 

 The Lord Chancellor : My Lord,, I have no doubt whatever, 

 from the language, the object, and the previsions of the second 

 secUon, that the marriage is invalid under the act. The answer 

 that has been given by the judges to the question propounded 

 bv vour Lordships is decisive of the whole case.-Lord Cotten- 

 ham • My Lords, I believe there is no difference of opinion 

 among us that the marriage is invalid under the Statute— The 

 Lord Chancellor: Then, my Lords, 1 shall move that the com- 

 mittee shall declare th <t the claim has not been sustained.— 

 Lord Brougham : My Lords, I agree to the motion ofmynoWJ 

 and learned friend, on the grounds that the object of the" 1 « 

 clear, and the words ot it are sufficient to carry that ob i e " " ,l r 

 eff If the words of this act had been, as were those : or ^ 



Hardwicke's Act, insufficient to carry the object of tne ^e* ^ 

 fire into effect, this marriage might have beenj >a iii. qu ^ 

 the General Marriage Act, which merely made m * r JjJ? case of 

 " it created no incapacity to contract them, as _ ot j a|ui can 

 . for instance, such persons by going i itg prov i- 



but 

 m 



defeat the purpose of the Act, and marry in spite 



sions. If the words of the General Marri" 



those of this Royal Marriage Act, we shouh. «- -• tie8 are ren- 



thc case of Ilderton ». Ilderton. In tn« Act i jj ,„ w hat- 



narry in spu C - like 



Marriage Act haa «£ of 



! ^°AitthTpsrt^arexen- 

 lie case of Ilderton o. Ilderton. uj this ac i J^r P o<es what- 

 aered incapable of marrying, and, for a" p t mast MJi ray 



ever, their marriages are made null a ", : eCom peUedto come 

 Lords, that I feel the deepest sorrow at being 



