Eftates and Rights. To this end and purpofe in this Kingdom, not only the Church but the State have prefcribed a fet Form, according to which all Marriages ought to be folemnized, which shall be fatiffactory to the Government, and be accounted valid to all Intents and Purposes, in Law: And this is the Act not only of the Ecclefiaftical, but the Civil Power, and the A&t it felf for the greater Security recorded in the Tower of London. But now to what purpose all this, if those, who are refractory against it, may affume to themselves a Privilege to set it aside at pleasure, and do as they lift? Some like not the Perfons appointed to perform it, fome the Time, fome the Form, fome will marry in their own way, and fome will take one another's word. And I am told, that very confiderable Lawyers have declared it as their Judgment, That these Marriages are good and valid in Law. Į defire it may be here taken notice of, that I fpeak not of what is valid in foro Con fcientia,but what is fo in foro Civili: I am against no Man's Liberty, that may confift with his Reputation, and with his and

a 2

others

others Safety here, and Salvation hereafter; and I think it hard, that Children fhould fuffer for the fault or folly of their Parents, and yet they are often unavoidably, notwithstanding their Innocence, involved therein; which ought to make Parents more careful to prevent it. But if fuch Marriages be legal, I would humbly requeft thofe Gentlemen of the long Robe, who are of that Opinion, to folve me fome few Doubts or Queftions.

I. Suppose a Man marry in his own humourous way, and afterwards marries another according to the Form prescribed by Law, who knew nothing of the first fuppofed Marriage, which of the Two fhall be reputed his tegal Wife? If the latter, then the firft was illegal: If the firft, then the Marriage in his own way makes void his Marriage according to Law; and fhe, who was legally marry'd, fhall be a Whore, and the other the boneft Woman.

II. Suppofe that he have Children by both thefe Women, which of these Women's Children fhall by Law inherit? III. Suppose no Joynture made, and

the

the Man dies, which of these two Wives shall have a right to the Thirds of his real Eftate? One would think the legal Marriage should give the legal Right; but then if the preceding blind Marriage cannot overthrow it, it must be because of its invalidity in Law; but if it can, to what purpose is any legal Marriage prefum'd?

IV, Suppose two consent in Marriage after their own way, and the Man afterwards denies the Marriage, and faith she was only his Whore, where is her remedy? or how fhall he be compell'd to own her, or live with her, or provide for her as a Wife?

V. Suppose the Woman fo diftafted as to deny fuch Marriage, and to leave him, and marry to another Man in fuch manner as prescribed by Law, what Law can enforce her to relinquish him, to whom the is legally marry'd, and to go and dwellwith her firft Husband, to whom he was perhaps after a fort marry'd, but denies it? And yet the Law ought to do this, if the firft Marriage was valid and legal, with refpect to the Civil State.

VI. Suppose two marry not legally, a 3

but

but by their own confent, may they not deny it again by consent, or part again by confent, or difpofe of themselves otherwife by their own confent, notwithstanding any thing the Law can do to hinder it? I do not fpeak of what they ought to do; nor ask whether the Law cannot punish them in other refpects? But whether the Law can interpose, as looking upon them as Man and Wife in the eye of the Law?

VII. Suppofe a Man hath one Wife, whom he marry'd according to Law, and one or more Wives at the fame time,whom he did not marry according to Law, can this Man be legally convicted, and made liable to the Punishment, which the Law inflicts for having at the fame time more Wives than one? Do not think this an idle Queftion: For I could name the Man, who had feventeen Wives come after him, when he was in a Gaol for fuch Pranks, and yet he came off; and, as I was in form'd, afterwards follow'd the fame trade again. Now if a Person in fuch eafe cannot be convict, befides one legal Wife he may have more Wives than the Alcoran allows a Turk, and yet be out of danger of I will

Law.

I will put no more fuch troublesome Questions, because I know not what to do with these, and should be glad to fee the Learned in the Law clear the matter. But tho' I cannot folve thefe Difficulties, yet any Man may easily know how to prevent them. For let no Marriage be valid, with refpect to Civil Rights and Advantages, but what is performed as the Law prescribes, and then none of these Inconveniences can arise, nor any of these Difficulties or Mischiefs follow thereupon. And here I should end this Inftance, but that there now occurs to my Memory a Story very pertinent to the prefent cafe: During the time of our uncivil Wars there was a Man, who for his clamorous exerting himself against the Church and the King, was fufficiently known by the Title of Bawling Marfbal, a Perfon of too great Parts to be fo ill employ'd: This Man came to a Kinsman of mine, then Vicar of Brixworth in Northamptonshire, and defired his leave to marry his Daughter in his Church; my Kinfiman readily granted his Request, and went along with the Company to Church, chiefly out of curio

a 4

fity,