sanctity of the ceremony. On the contrary, it has been studiously contrived to erase from the cold, business-like declaration of the wedding parties, every (the minutest) syllable which could by possibility be construed into an admission that the ceremony is any thing more than a mere bargain or civil contract. The expressive words "till death us do part" are cautiously omitted: even the wedding-ring-that simple pledge and symbol of neverending affection-seems entirely discarded from the ceremony; and the holy marriage vow, which the fond couple once thought was registered in high heaven, will in future be considered, by the disciples of the doctrine of marriage by civil contract, as a mere verbal engagement, like any other common-place worldly transaction; and being so considered, it is but to follow out the principle of all other civil contracts in this country, in order to have a speedy and cheap divorce whenever it may please the contracting parties to be displeased with each other: for this law would indeed be anomalous, if it were to operate upon civil contracts of marriage otherwise than as other laws of civil contract are permitted to operate on every contract, which the contracting parties are allowed to dissolve at their mutual pleasure.

If the common law of the land be not (and we believe it is not quite) strong enough to enable the contracting parties to effect this repeal of their union in so summary a manner, we feel quite assured that the day is not far distant when "An Act for Divorces in England" will be passed, comprehending a scheme of counter-registration and disunion; the fees for which may be set forth in schedules A, B, and C, with columns for statements of ages, causes of separation, amount of income, and other particulars, which will naturally, or in some instances practically, occur to the enlightened statesmen of the day. If this be not done, we aver that this enacted form of civil marriage contract is the most uncivil law extant; for it is well known that there is no direct method for a poor couple to unmarry, which a poor couple can afford to put in force; and therefore one good, large, sweeping, Whig-Radical, general, pauper-like act of parliament for the divorce of all those who cannot bear the present expense of getting rid of a wife, will be hailed with enthusiasm by many of the civil contractors.

Section 21 gives to the infidel, the atheist (if there be such a fool or madman), and the irreligious by profession, the benefit of a snug, smuggled-up marriage, in the house of the superintendent. What an inducement for a civil contractor to boast himself "of no religion at all," since all holy observances are entirely scouted! As to the lower classes, or, indeed, almost any persons in London, their means of getting married, under this system, will be still more facile than in the country; and no legislative prophet can foresee all the ill consequences producible in the metropolis by this abominable act of parliament.

If there be a licence, even from the superintendent, we take it that the notice need not be read to the board of guardians, pursuant to section 6.

The marriage fees to the registrar, for marriages in his presence, are, by section 22, ten shillings where there is a licence; and otherwise, five shillings. We are not aware of any marriage, in his presence, that can take place without the licence, schedule (C), and therefore the "otherwise" we leave to the lawyers.

By section 23, the registrar is to register the marriages "solemnized" [had] in his presence. This, and the 24th section, is all about the registrar and his book; for which book we have no respect, and we sincerely hope that every good christian female will keep her name out of it, whenever it is to be used in the counting-house.

By section 25, after a marriage, no proof of previous residence of either party, or of consent, is requisite, nor may any evidence be given to prove the contrary.

To us this clause appears fraught with ill effects. For instance :-Supposing a female minor to be married clandestinely, in consequence of a false statement that she is of full age, in which case the parent or guardian would not be sought for. This false statement may be made by the man, without the female's knowledge, according to section 4, and the form schedule (A), to which it refers. The notice shall be so read as not to be noticed; or it shall be read in a populous district, three successive weeks, to guardians who neither know nor care any thing about the female. She may be on a visit in the neighbourhood, and her parent or guardian residing one hundred miles off. The certificate is granted, and the marriage takes place in the counting-house, with all the "solemnity" contemplated by the Act. Before the parties have had time to leave the house of the superintendent, the parent or guardian appears, and claims the daughter or the ward. It seems to us that the summary process would be, to take all the parties before a magistrate, or so to arrest future mischief as to put an end to this contract so "solemnized" without consent; but the act states that the non-consent cannot be proved. We know that the AttorneyGeneral may sue for all the young woman's estate and interest in any property; but we think that the better way would be to dissolve the union at once. If the parties must be man and wife, we see no reason for depriving them of the means of existence; and in that instance the Attorney-General's officiousness is only making much worse that which is already bad enough.

We have no objection to section 26, presuming that the registrar mentioned in it is the registrar of the diocese. The lax language of the Whig-Radical laws obliges us to scrutinize every expression; and we should be vexed to find that our bishops were to have any personal transactions or

communications, under this law, with other registrars than their

own.

On the subsequent sections, down to and inclusive of the 34th, we have nothing to offer, well knowing that the application of those sections to the particular circumstances to which they refer, cannot be under the cognizance of more intellectual and amiable individuals than those gentlemen who perform the duties of registrars of the several dioceses in this kingdom. It has been our good fortune to know many of those excellent persons intimately; and, save and except so far as regards the office and person of the registrar-general under this act of parliament, we feel that there is something like an abuse of the word "registrar" throughout; and that if some other name than registrar could have been selected for Mr. Superintendent, it would not have obliged us to a kind of severity upon his very cognomen, which has been somewhat distressing to us; for when the word "registrar" summoned before us all the by-gone notions we had entertained of the diocesan registrar, we could scarcely refrain from exclaiming,

"Look here, upon this picture, and on this!"

We pass by sections 35 and 36, and have already commented on section 37, which, like section 38, contains expressions and provisions for punishment that all come too late, and will be of little use to the injured parties. The whole mischief is invented by the statute itself, which makes room for the perpetration of the offences; and even if those offences shall in any case be visited with the severity incident to the laws of Old England, what advantageth it the ill-used party, or what, indeed, does it effect for the country at large?

Thus, the 37th section gives what the law had already givena special action on the case for special damages.

The caveat (which may be entered "frivolously," according to the opinion of the registrar-general,) may be merely entered ignorantly; and, before going to be married, we must consider how we shall best avoid civil actions and criminal prosecutions; and how we shall be able to recover of an objector, who is poor as well as frivolous, the special damages arising from his caveat, for which he paid five shillings—the only evidence of his respectability.

We have said that some of this new law is assimilated to the old; but we do not find the same efficient officers to direct its application, and that makes a considerable difference in the whole affair.

Passing over section 39, (creating three classes of new crimes,) we hasten to the 40th section, which, for the last time in act the first, brings before us our old friend, the superintendent, in

no very amiable character, being nothing more nor less than that of a felon.

It is true, that by this clause, he is punishable as a felon for improperly certifying; but we are at a loss to find the penalty for his obstructing, preventing, or delaying a marriage: an immediate injury, for which there is no immediate remedy! an injury, which he may, by nonfeasance, as well as misfeasance, inflict, in as various modes, as there are various inducements. Let us suppose that this officer is the father or the son of the person, male or female, to be married, and that the parties are of sufficient age to marry; or behold him the disappointed suitor; or that some friend of his, or himself, by some of the many natural relationships, or by accidental circumstances of acquaintanceship, or by bribery from others, is interested in delaying, and does delay, even for a day, the intended marriage: there is assuredly no punishment sufficient for such defection of his duty and when it is asked-How is it to be helped? we say, why do the laws invent the possibility of commission of offences of this kind? Why do they put it in the power of an almost irresponsible officer to act, both ministerially and judicially, in such an important affair, either right or wrong, according to the extent of his acquirements, or to the good or ill construction of his head, or his heart?

We can imagine many cases where delay would be of everlasting injury, and where the directions of this tyrannical marriage law would be equally injurious.

We will, however, endeavour to part with Mr. Superintendent in as good humour as we can, by hinting, for his benefit, to those who have created this officer, that they must assume that he is already married, or is to act under a vow of celibacy, for he cannot be married pursuant to this newfangled law, if his intended be in the same district, unless he perform the incompatible duties of lay priest and bridegroom, at the same time; or persuade that Frankenstein of his own creation-not the general, but the suburban registrar-to stand forth as his proxy, on the particular occasion.

We earnestly entreat the registrar-general to use his illimitable power in preventing serious mischief here; or, perhaps he may, in his next official proclamations, condescend to enlighten vulgar minds, by explaining how superintendents, so circumstanced, should proceed.

Our suggestion would be, that before entering on office, and, as a test of qualification, the first test and trial of this new law should be had by all superintendents and registrars, unionists and guardians, who should be all single men, for this purpose reserved and selected, beginning with the registrar-general himself; or, it may be that an act of parliament should be passed, appointing a superintendent, with a "Be it enacted, that no

person shall officiate as a marrying-man under the new marriage code, unless, and until he shall have been duly married according to the provisions of that code."

The length of our comments upon the Marriage Act, prevents us from treating the subject otherwise than as that act itself treats it, merely as a worldly affair, without entering into considerations of a higher and less common fabric: but we have not so much occasion to enlarge on the great importance of treating the topic of marriage with reference to its divine origin, appointment, and obligation, since the reader may be fully informed and highly gratified, by a perusal of the sermon lately preached at the Church of St. Stephen's, Walbrook, by the rector, Dr. Croly, whose force of argument, bearing directly upon those points, is beyond praise. The ill consequences of marriage by civil contract, are, by him, forcibly depicted; and one of its most probable consequences, that of the facility of obtaining divorce, is shown by historical examples to have produced results destructive to the well-being of every society in which marriage by civil contract has been introduced.

To attempt to review the excellent discourse of Dr. Croly, or to cull select passages from its eloquent pages, would perhaps deprive some of our readers of the greater pleasure of perusing the whole of that admirable production, of which the third edition is already exhausted.

We must content ourselves with the duller task of what the old lawyers used to call it," a reading" on these statutes; but we have neither time nor space, nor do we deem it essential, to criticise the "principle" of that other "great measure," the Registry Act-so fully as the act for marriages.

We readily admit that a general registration of the births, marriages, and deaths of all denominations of persons, (whether professing any religion or not,) is most desirable; but we deny that this new law will, more than partially, effect that object.

On the contrary, like the imposition of excessive duties on the importation of foreign goods, this Registration Act contains provisions which will have a similar effect to that of actual prohibition. Its prying, meddling, busy, inquisitorial spirit, must assuredly prove loathsome and detestable, when it shall, ever and anon, present itself in one fantastic shape or another, haunting, by day and by night, the inmost retirements of the mansion and the cottage; at moments, too, when delicacy would most acutely feel the shock of the brutal intrusion ;-when the young mother shall be all anxiety for the existence of her new-born babe; or when her own, and its dissolution shall be so dubious as to demand that no extraneous thought, no unhallowed interference shall be obtruded, to add new anguish to hearts already enough immured in grief, and overwhelmed with painful solicitude. Surely this is not the time to expect that a distracted