particular men for it to be performed by and as it is not only a civil but also a religious contract, and in the very nature of it, a most folemn one; I think that is most confiftent with every idea of DECENCY, PROPRIETY, and DUE SOLEMNITY, that its OBLIGATIONS fhould be ratified and confirmed at the SACRED ALTAR. For the fame reasons I conclude it best that marriage should be performed by a perfon in orders; and what is beft, is fittest to be done; and what is fittest to be done, ought to be done; and there is an end of the difpute. "The Church of England, though she does not confider marriage as a facrament, yet looks upon it as an inftitution so SACRED, that it ought always to be celebrated by an ECCLESIASTICAL perfon." BROUGHTON, Hift. lib. title, MARRIAGE.To which I readily fubfcribe,

I COULD fay many things more in favour of the intervention of an ECCLESIASTIC, which I omit, left it should be thought that

*This is founded on the opinions and practices of the primitive Church-and muft be confidered as an inftitution abfolutely apoftolical.

I am only contending for the power, influence, and wealth of that order of men to which I belong. However I have no right to facrifice truth merely to convince the world I have laid afide professional prejudice.

HAVING fpoken to the circumstances of perfon and place, that of time seems next to claim our attention. Though the laws of God and of nature know no diftinction of times, relative to the celebration of matrimony, yet the time appointed by our cannon and ftatute-law cannot but be thought highly adviseable; for certainly the morning, when men are cool and confiderate, is the only fit time for concluding a compact as lasting as life. Were restrictions of this kind removed, a man of family, fortune, and worth, during intoxication, might be joined to a prostitute. Indeed was it indifferent as to time and place, for tying legally the bridal knot, fuch diftrefs to families, and eventually to fociety, would enfue, as are not easily expreffed. The confent of the father, which Scripture makes abfolutely necessary to marriage, would be wholly neglected. If then Hh 4

the

the formalities of the Marriage-Act are expedient for the fecurity of what the Bible holds SACRED; fo far as they are directed to that end, the want of them ought to invalidate marriage; and they do not deferve to be denominated odious, cruel, unnatural, or irreligious. To which I will add, that for uniformity's fake, they ought to be complied with in all cafes. In reality, clandeftine marriages in general are never attempted but from fome finifter views. Who complains of the provifions of the Marriage-Act, but defigning men, fortune-hunters, and difobedient children?-But why not complain of the law of God?-Thofe that will not conform, deserve to lose the privileges of marriage. I might strengthen this reasoning by arguments drawn from the obedience that we owe to governors; without favouring flavery or the doctrine of paffive obedience, but at prefent let a bare hint fuffice. Besides, these provifions are neceffary for the fecurity of the happiness of mankind, by preventing them from marrying rafhly and indifcreetly.

WHEN I contemplate these several matters,

and

H

and find the Marriage-Act, from the general tenor of it, for the good of fociety, and not repugnant to the divine law; whether it owes its fupport to aristocratic confequence, or the wisdom of experience, is an enquiry I am totally indifferent about. There is no doubt but it is flattering to the pride of rank, as it throws temporary obstacles in the way of plebeians marrying with the unthinking daugh ters of the nobility and gentry. Undoubtedly it is odious to fortune-hunters, because very unfavourable to their schemes. But those things have no weight with me; nor the confideration, which deferves more attention than what I have just been mentioning, that some avaricious parents make this law stoop to very selfish and contracted views. Cafes of this kind may happen, but they can be but few; and therefore scarce deserve mentioning, when we reflect on the many good advantages refulting from the fecurity of parental authority. And further, when I confider that the Marriage-Act had for its father the greatest lawyer this country has to boaft, equally famed for his ability and humanity; I am not a little prejudiced in its

Favour; but when I view it as calculated for the good of fociety, and the happiness of mankind, I cannot but declare myself its friend; and therefore think those positions very wrong, which reprefent it as founded on the fordid principles of a few noble families, who, to gratify their avarice, pride, or ambition, formed restrictions oppreffive to the whole people. It is undoubtedly calculated to prevent precipitate love-matches between thoughtless boys and giddy girls, which are better prevented, because they generally terminate in mutual mifery. It is not a boyish paffion, precipitate and temporary, something like the fudden glare of lightning, dazzling for a while, but soon extinguished, that will form the basis of matrimonial happiness; but the warm affection of difinterested friendfbip-this will lay a foundation for kindnefs, complacency, and endearments as last¬ ing as life; and on this bafis

-"Love's a gen'rous paffion "Which feeks the happiness of her we love." LEE RIVAL QUEENS.

But