449

1753. JOURNAL of the PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES in the POLITICAL CLUB, continued from p. 410.

I shall next give you another Debate rve bad in our Club upon the Bill for preventing Clandeftine Marriages, which was that we bad upon what we call the third Reading of the Bill, when the ufual Motion was made, that the Bill do pass; cobere upon T. Herminius flood up, and spoke in A Subftance tbus.

Mr. Prefident,
SIR,

U

B

things, Sir, we cannot avoid being apprehenfive left the whole power of our government fhould foon center in the other house, or at least fo much as to fet it above being controlled by the crown and the commons united together. But why should I fay the crown and the commons? The commons, Sir, have no power, no conftitutional being, but what they have by their reprefentatives in this houfe; and if we confider what a large fhare of property the other houfe has in every county, and what a number of our cities and boroughs are become abfolutely dependent upon fome neighbouring peer, have we not reafon to fear, left the other houfe should become the abfolute difpofers of most of the feats in this? For this purpofe the fole power of being the ultimate and fupreme judges in all cafes of property, which we seem now to have yielded to them, must always be of great ufe; and from experience we know, that our ftanding order against the peer's concerning himself in the election of members to ferve for the commons in parliament, is an order which even now we find it impoffible to carry into execution; much lefs will it be poffible to carry it into execution after a majority of us have been returned by the influence of the other houfe: Nay, I do not know but I may live to fee it D put to the vote here, and carried by a great majority, to have this order erafed out of our journals, as being difrespectful to the other houfe; for the refpect due to it is already, I find, made use of as an argument for biaffing the votes of gentlemen in this.

PON the fecond reading of this bill I was one who gave my vote for its being committed, which I did not out of any respect to the other house, for I do not think we owe them any fuch refpect, as they often upon the fecond reading reject bills fent up by us, and fome which have been very unanimoufly and deliberately agreed to in this house. I did fo because I approved of the principle upon which the bill was pretended to be founded. Ialways thought that clandef tine marriages, efpecially fuch as are fcan- C dalous or infamous with refpect to either of the contracting parties, fhould be prevented, if it could be done without producing greater evil, which is that of preventing marriage itself; therefore I was for fending the bill to a committee, in order to fee if it could be fo amended as to prevent its producing this evil, to which it plainly appeared to be liable when it made its first appearance in this house. Accordingly it has been very much altered in the committee, but far, I think, from being amended; for it is still liable not only to this evil, but to almost every bad confequence that could at first be apprehended from it, of which that of its tending towards introducing an aristocracy E is one of the most apparent.

Now, Sir, if the other houfe should once get into their poffeffion the power of electing, or rather of nominating a majority of the members of this, I fhall fubmit to the confideration of gentlemen, and it deferves the confideration of every com moner in the kingdom, whether our conftitution would not be entirely overturned? They might, perhaps, continue the fhadow of a monarchy; but our king F. would be under the neceffity of entirely fubmitting to be governed by the leaders of the other houfe; and this would add to their influence at all elections of members to serve in this, because they would thereby get the executive part of our government into their hands, and confequently the nomination to all pofts and employments in the ftate, in which we may fuppofe their fons, their brothers,

It is a maxim allowed, Sir, by all the best writers upon government, that power or dominion will always follow property; and if we confider how vaftly the number of our nobility has been increased finse the beginning of this century, what extenfive poffeffions are already vested in that body, what new poffeffions may be added by the marriage of heireffes, and the now fo frequent nobilitating of rich commoners, and how independent of the crown all our landholders, especially our nobility, have been rendered, ever fince the abolishing of military tenures, and the fuppreffing of the court of wards and liveries: I fay, if we confider thefe G

G

October, 1753

and

450

PROCEEDINGS of the POLITICAL CLUB, &c. .0&.

and even their valets and footmen would
not be forgot. Would our king in fuch
cafe be any thing more than a doge of
Venice? Would any commoner in Eng-
land have a refource against the op-
preffion of a neighbouring lord? And as
our nobility would always take care to
have fome of themfelves at the head of A
our army and navy, it would be impof-
fible for the king or people to recover
themselves out of their hands, or to re-
ftore the conftitutionwithout a civil war;
which, if fuccefsful on the fide of the
people, might probably end in fubjecting
us to an abfolute and arbitrary monarch;
and if unfuccefsful, would probably end
in abolishing even the fhadow of what B

is monarchical or democratical in our
form of government.

Upon this occafion, Sir, I cannot avoid obferving the great difference between that affembly in which the conftitutional power of our nobility is lodged, and that in which the conftitutional power of the commons is lodged. The other houfe is a certain, fixt and unchangeable affembly, in which every one of our nobility has a feat established hereditarily in his family; whereas this houfe confifts of a changeable, fluctuating affembly of men, no one member of which is abfolutely certain of having a feat here in the next enfuing

that before the paffing of this act, the crown had too great a power as to the fummoning of thofe peers who were to appear and vote at fuch trials; but it must likewife be granted, that by this law the body of peers have got a power of prowould probably make ufe of this power, tecting any one of their number, and if they fhould ever form a defign of incroaching both upon the crown and the commons, and ingroffing to themfelves alone the whole power of our government; and fuch a defign as this they may very probably form, if they should ever acquire fuch an influence over our elections, as to be able to return a majority of the members of this houfe; for they would probably prevail with most of the leading men in this houfe to concur in fuch a defign, by promifing to adopt them into the order of nobility; and they have the establishment of the prefent aristocratical and tyrannical form of C for directing their method of proceed. government in Venice as a precedent ing.

Until after the end of the 13th century, Sir, every citizen of Venice of any fubstance had a vote in their great council, and a chance of being chofen into the higheft offices of the ftate, as well as being protected by that council against the greatest man in their city; but a few

parliament. The former therefore may D of their richest citizens having then got

probably unite in augmenting the power of their affembly at the expence of our conftitution; becaufe every member of it thereby increafes the power and the confequence of his family for ever; but no member of this houfe can well be fuppofed to concur in any unconstitutional defign for increafing the power of this affembly, becaufe it is fo far from in- E creating the power or confequence of his family, that he himself may fuffer by it, in cafe he should not be returned a member of the next enfuing parliament. And for the fame reafon the other houfe is much more capable of concerting and steadily purfuing ambitious and unconftitutional defigns, than this houfe can ever be fuppofed to be; to which I must add, that by a law paffed fince the revolution, it is rendered much more difficult for the crown to prevent the profecution of fuch defigns.

F

When I fay this, Sir, I believe every gentleman will fuppofe I mean the law paffed in the 7th of king William, by which it is provided, that upon the trial G of any peer or peerefs for treafon or misprifion, all the peers who have a right to fit and vote in parliament, fhall be duly fummoned to appear at fuch trial, and to vote at the fame. I fhall readily grant

too much influence in their great council, they prevailed with it to pafs a law, by which it was enacted, that none but fuch a certain number of families fhould for the future have a right to appear or vote in their great council; from which time Venetians, and none but they, or fuch as thofe families affumed the name of noble they have fince been pleafed to adopt, have now any fhare in the government of that republick; for as to all the rest of the people, they are as great flaves as the people are in Turkey, and they are treat ed with more infolence by their nebles, than the Turks are by their bathaws; which would probably be our cafe, should our nobility be ever able to ingrofs the whole power of our government to themfelves alone; and it is certain, that we are in more danger of it, than the Venetians were at the time this change in their form of government was established ; for they had then no nobility among tinct from the people, acting in an af them, much lefs a body of nobility diffembly by themfelves alone, and poffeffed of a negative in their legislative power, as well as the laft refort in the jurisdictive.

Sir, when we confider the circumftances and condition of the state and people

of

1753. PROCEEDINGS of the POLITICAL CLUB, &c. 451

A

of Venice when this remarkable change
in their form of government was brought
about, we have reafon to be furprised
how it was poffible to concert fuch a de-
fign, much more how it was poffible to
carry it into execution; and we can af-
cribe it to no caufe but that of their hav-
ing allowed a few families to accumulate
too great a fhare of the wealth of their
country: This thererefore, as well as a
great many other inftances, muft convince
us, that there is no preferving a form of
government which has any thing of the
democratical in its conftitution, but by
difperfing, as much as poffible, the wealth
and property of the fociety through the
whole body of the people, and by pre-
venting, as much as poffible, every custom
or regulation that may enable thofe, who
have already too much, to accumulate
more. That this would be one of the
bad effects of the bill now under our con-
fideration, if paffed into a law, I think
no man can conteft; for it is certain,
that parents generally have no confidera- C

wards reducing them to the fame abject flavish condition, which the people of Venice were reduced to by their great council in the beginning of the 14th century. But this of its being dangerous to our conftitution is not the only bad confequence to be apprehended from paffing this bill inte a law; for it will really prove a fort of prohibition of marriage with refpect to all our poorer fort of people, because it will render the folemnization of that ceremony fo tedious and troublesome, or fo expenfive, that many of them will either chufe to live fingle, or agree to live together without any marriage at all. We know how averfe our B people generally are to a proclamation of banns, even in the prefent method, when in any of our holy-day weeks the whole may be performed, and the loving couple made happy by marriage in three or four days; how much more averfe then will they be to this way of marrying, when they must give a week's notice before the banns can be firft proclaimed, and after that must wait above three weeks before the proclamation of banns can be finished, and the marriage ceremony performed according to the rules prefcribed by this bill? We may therefore with great reafon prefume, that very few even of the most vulgar fort of our people will fubmit to be married by way of proclamation of banns; and what with ftamp-duties and fees we have made licences fo expenfive, that very few of them can bear the expence, and if they could, there are but few of them that know how to come at a licence.

tion for the affections of their child. Let a man be but rich, he may he deformed, he may be brutith in his nature, nay, he may be next degree to an ideot, yet fill an old mifer will think him a proper hufband for his only daughter. Let a woman be but rich, he may be ugly, fhe may be difeafed, the may be justly fuf. D pected as to her chaftity, yet ftill an old mifer will think her a fit match for his only fon; and in both cafes the father often takes every method in his power to force a compliance with his defire: Nay, we know, that the fon or daughter has often no way of avoiding fuch a deteftable match, but by getting him or herself married clandeftinely to fome other; but E this refource will be taken away from every unfortunate child, fhould this bill be paffed into a law, fo that our avariti. ous rich men will have an indefeasible method of accumulating more wealth in- to their families; and ambition, the next governing paffion of all rich mifers, will appropriate every rich heirefs in the king- F dom to the eldest fon of fome of our nobility, which in a few years must greatly increase the property and influence of the other houfe of parliament, to the manifeft danger of our prefent happy conftitution.

In short, Sir, I think there can be nothing more evident than that this bill

What then will be the confequence, Sir, of paffing this bill into a law? In my opinion, the certain confequence will be that of rendering common whoring as frequent among the lower fort of people, as it is now among thofe of the better fort; and multitudes of wenches in all parts of the country, when they find they cannot get hufbands according to law, will fet up the trade; fo that the bill ought really to be called, a bill for the incrcafe of fornication in this kingdom. How this will fuit with the religion or morals of our people I fall leave to the confideration of our clergy, but I am fure it will not fuit with the happiness of the fociety, which must always depend upon increating the breed of the industrious and labouring fort of people among us; and therefore instead of making a law for pre

muft tend towards introducing an ariflo-G venting this increafe by throwing obfta

cratical form of government amongst us; therefore I must be of opinion, that our giving our confent to its being paffed into a law, would be a fort of treachery towards our conftituents, as it is a nep to

cles in the way of marriage, we should confider what is the caufe that makes clandeftine marriages fo frequent amongst us, and endeavour to remove that cause by fome new regulation. I fhall not pre1112

tead

452

PROCEEDINGS of the POLITICAL CLUB, &c.

tend to offer any fcheme for this purpofe, but I must fay, that I can fee no neceffity for a proclamation of banns: I can fee no reafon why the pariin fhould be told fo often, and in such a folemn and pub-. lick manner, that there is a marriage intended between John the plowman and Mary the dairy maid, and it is plain, A that neither the clergy nor the promoters of this bill think a proclamation of banns abfolutely neceffury, because they admit of a marriage Licence without it. I am therefore apt to fuspect, that this proclamation of bains was introduced, and is now to be enforced by law, in order to render licences neceliary; and the only ufe of a licence I take to be that of put- B ting money into the pockets of our clergymen or fome of their officers: Whereas, if the parfon of every parith had a power to marry people at liis church without either licence or proclamation of banns, I believe, we should never have any fuch marriage fhop fet up as that at Keith's chapel, or any of thofe now kept within the rules of the Fleet or King's-bench prifons; and if there were no fuch publick marriage fhops kept, a young gentleman or a young lady would find it very difficult to get married to any low or infamous perfon, because a fettled clergyman would have fome regard to his character, and as fuch clergymen are not below the law, they might be prevented by law from marrying any but fuch as they D knew, or fuch as were recommended to them by fome perfon of character whom they did know, who should always be prefent at the ceremony, and a figning witness to the regifter and certificate of marriage.

I fhall not fay, Sir, that this would prevent a young gentleman or young lady's being ever married without the confent of their parents or guardians; nor do I think that fuch marriages ought to be abfolutely prohibited, because it would be giving a greater power to parents, and efpecially guardians, than they ought to have, and which, from experience we may prefume, would often be made a very bad, a very tyrannical ufe of. But it would, I am perfuaded, prevent infamous or fcandalous marriages, because there would then be no shop for the folemnization of fuch a marriage, as their only fupport now arifes from the multitude of vulgar marriages folemnized at fuch shops, because they cannot be fo conveniently, or at fo cheap a rate, folemnized any where elfe. Whereas, if a marriage could be folemnized as conveniently, and for as little expence, at the parish church, and by a regular clergyman, even the moit

E

vulgar would chufe to be married there ;
and I fhould readily agree to any law you
pleafe for enforcing the keeping of a re-
gular regifter at every church or chapel
where marriages could be folemnized,
and for the more eatly convicting, and
more feverely punishing fuch as fhould be
guilty of bigamy, but I cannot agree to
what will be in fome measure a prohibi-
tion of marriage amongst the poor, for the
fake of preventing what we call clandef
tine marriages amongst the rich; for mar-
riage may be compared to the importation
of fome of the conveniences of life: If
you lay heavy taxes upon fuch importati-
and if by fevere laws you prevent imug-
on, you of courfe introduce fmuggling,
gling, you force the poor to make the best
fhift they can without the use of such
conveniencies; fo by taxing and throw
ing obftacles in the way of marriage, you
of course introduce clandeftine marriages,
and if you prevent thefe by feverer laws,
you will force the poor to make the best
fhift they can without marrying. This,
I am convinced, will be the effect of the
bill now before us, and as this is neither
confiftent with the religion or morals of
the people, nor with the interest or hap-
pinefs of the fociety, I must be against
paffing this bill into a law.

The next that spoke was L. Bellienus, befe
Speech upon this Occafion was to the follow-
ing Effect.

Mr. Prefident,
SIR,

HAVE not very long had the honour

of a feat in this august affembly, but, I believe, the oldeft member amongst us never was prefent at fuch an extraordinary debate as what we are now upon. The real question now before us is, whether we hall leave our young gentlemen of fortune, whilft under age, a prey to bawds and prostitutes, and our young ladies of fortune, whilft under age, a prey to fharpers and fortune-hunters, or whether we fhall pafs a bill which alone can effectually put an end to this evil, by F which fo many of our beft families have fuffered, and more may fuffer, and a bill which cannot poffibly be attended with any inconvenience or danger to the fociety? To hear fuch a question seriously oppofed, and gravely debated, muft certainly appear very ftrange to every one, who is not well acquainted with our constitution ; and if there were any foreigners now in our gallery, I hope there are not, they would certainly fuppofe, that many of us were fharpers or fortune-hunters,

G

J-B-

and