On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
Act was passed , ( 3 Geo . IV . c . 75 , ) whereby marriages solemnized by license , obtained without the proper consent , were rendered valid , where the parties continued to cohabit until the death of one of them . Some of the provisions of this statute , however , being found of an inconvenient nature , the statute 4 Geo . IV . c . 76 , which contains the present marriage law of England , was passed . The chief distinction between this act and that of
George II . will be found in the clause , declaring what marriages shall be void ; with regard to which the law now is , that in order to render the marriage void , it must be knowingly and wilfully entered into by both parties * contrary to the provisions of the act . Before concluding this slight sketch of the history of the law of marriage in England , it will , perhaps , not be considered improper to state the arguments relative to the validity of marriages by Dissenting ministers , before the statute of George the Second . o _ ___ _
Before the statute 26 Geo . II . c . 33 , marriages were of two kinds ; such as were celebrated in facie ecclesice , or by a person in holy orders , and such as , though contracted per verba de presenti , yet wanted that solemnity . The legal effect of the latter marriages has been a subject of much dispute , and is still considered by many as an unsettled question . On the one hand , it is contended that , by the English law , a solemnization by a person in holy
orders was always requisite to form a legal marriage , though it is admitted that the parties are bound by the contract ; on the other hand , it is said , that before the Marriage Act , the contract itself was a sufficient marriage for all civil purposes which do not require the intervention of the ecclesiastical courts , by which such a marriage is regarded as imperfect . The following js a succinct statement of the arguments and authorities on both sides of the
question . It is said by those who contend for the necessity of a religious ceremony , that the practice of such a solemnization , in very early times , appears from the law of dower ad ostium ecclesice ;* from which we learn that it was customary for the husband on his marriage to endow his wife at the church door . The rule is said to have been so strict at one time , that a marriage privately performed in a chamber by the bishop , being without any
celebration of mass , was held invalid ; f but in a much later case , a marriage m an ale-house , solemnized by a person in orders , was adjudged to be good . J It appears in the argument of counsel , in the case of Bunting v . Leapingwell >§ that children born after a contract per verba de presenti , are illegU timate , unless the marriage ceremony afterwards takes place , which-will have relation to the contract . So in the case of Hey don v . Gould , \\ where , on an , appeal to the delegates , it appeared that the parties married were Sabbatarians , and had been married by one of their own ministers , ( not in orders , }
who had used the form of Common Prayer , except the ring , it was held an insufficient marriage . Many dicta of the Judges may also be cited to shew that a religious solemnization was considered by them to be essential . ^] " The common law recognizes and follows the ecclesiastical law in this respect , Thus , when issue is joined on the . fact of marriage in a writ of dower , the trial is by the bishop ' s certificate , who , of course , is guided by the rules of the ecclesiastical law , and will not certify 3 marriage unless a religious ceremony has taken place : yet the courts of common law regard such a
* Lit . Ten . sec . fcli . f 10 Ed . I . 4 Via . Ab . 218 , J Tarry v . Browne , 13 Car . II . I Sid . 64 . § Moor , 169 . it 1 Sack ., 119 . H Co . Litt ., 33 , a , note 10 . 1 $ id . 13 « .
Untitled Article
761 History of the English Marriage Lawx
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1828, page 76, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2557/page/4/
-