Causes," such court to possess all the jurisdiction which the ecclesiastical courts have exercised in respect of divorces à menså et thoro, suits of nullity of marriage, restitution of conjugal rights, or jactitation of marriage. Thus the old form of proceeding for a separation from bed and board (à mensâ et thoro) is abolished, and for it is substituted the procedure for a "judicial separation," which is, in effect, a severance of the marriage tie, save that it does not enable either of the parties to marry again; but it places the woman in the same position as a feme sole, enabling her to hold and deal with property wholly free from the control of her husband; and in the case of the man, relieves him from all obligation to support his wife, and frees him from the possibility of having a spurious issue palmed upon him. But this court is armed with further power: it can absolutely separate man and wife so as to enable both of them to marry again. It can make provision for the injured wife according to the means of the guilty husband, by the name of "alimony." It can allow damages, if asked for, against the adulterer, and order him to pay the costs of the proceedings. It can, moreover, by the amending Act (22 & 23 Vict. c. 61), direct the custody of the children, and make such provision for the children of the marriage or their respective parents, out of any property which is the subject of ante- or post-nuptial settlement, as to the court shall seem fit. Thus the indissolubility of marriage is no longer maintained by the law of England. It is no longer necessary to resort to the legislature for a special Act of Parliament, preceded by a suit in the Ecclesiastical Court for a separation à mensa et thoro, and an action against the adulterer for damages at common law, to obtain a divorce; but the wronged party may now at once, at no great cost, and with little delay, obtain relief from one of the most grievous evils of social life. It must, however, be said, that the wife cannot obtain a dissolution of her marriage (so as to enable her to marry again), unless the adultery of her husband is coupled with desertion of her for two years and upwards without reasonable cause, or with gross cruelty, or with bigamy, and some revolting offences; whereas the husband may obtain a divorce upon proof of his wife's adultery alone. In no case, however, will a divorce be granted if there has been collusion or connivance between the husband and wife with a view to obtaining a decree of the court. Nullity of marriage, although dealt with by the same tribunal as divorce, is distinct in its nature: it does not involve the dissolution of a marriage; but the object sought in such a proceeding is, an authoritative declaration that there never was any legal marriage between the parties, that it is null and void ab initio. The grounds of such a decree may be physical or mental incapacity to engage in such a contract, a previous marriage, consanguinity or affinity (in which is included marriage with a deceased wife's sister or husband's brother); also force, or fraud, or duresse to procure the marriage; also error de persona, as where a person intending to marry one individual is actually married to another. Proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights may assume the shape of a suit for judicial separation, or even for a dissolution of marriage. The prayer for a direction to return to cohabitation may be met by the answer, that to do so would be dangerous to health or safety, or that adultery has been committed; either of which, if established, would justify the withdrawal from cohabitation and in the one case, a decree of judicial separation would follow; and in the other, that of a dissolution of marriage. Such is a brief summary of the change made in the matrimonial law of England. Scotland still retains its own peculiar laws on this subject; and Ireland is not as yet affected by the alteration of the law of England. And since so great an innovation has been introduced, it may not be out of place to notice the light in which the contract of marriage has been viewed by ourselves and some other nations.

From the curious document preserved by Selden (Uxor Ebraica,' c. xxx., vol. iii., 845, folio ed. of his works), whereby John de Cameys, in the reign of Edward I., transferred his wife and her property to William Paynel; and also, from the reference to the laws of Howel the Good, at the end of this article, it would seem that, in the early periods of English law, a divorce might be had by mutual consent; but all trace of such a custom is lost.

By the common law of England marriage was a civil contract, and the ordinary courts of justice asserted their jurisdiction over this as well as every other description of contract. At length, the rite of marriage having been elevated to the dignity of a sacrament by Pope Innocent III., 1215, the ecclesiastical courts asserted the sole jurisdiction over it. And notwithstanding it was divested of that high character at the Reformation, it still remained in the eye of the law a religious contract, necessary to be celebrated by some formal rites wherein the priest was to officiate; and generally, except under special exemption, necessarily within the walls of a sacred edifice; wherefore it was that the ecclesiastical courts treated the matrimonial tie with such reverence, and the law of the land deemed the contract indissoluble, thus rendering it necessary to resort to the legislature for a special act of parliament to set aside a marriage. It was not, however, without doubt and much discussion that the opinion that marriage was indissoluble was arrived at by the early reformers. In the reign of Edward VI., Parr, the Marquis of Northampton, obtained a divorce in the Ecclesiastical Court by reason of the adultery of his wife, a commission (over which Cranmer presided) was appointed to inquire whether he could marry again; but before a decision was given he did marry again. The commissioners afterwards answered, "That the

ARTS AND SCI. DIV, VOL. III.

bond of wedlock being broken by the mere act of infidelity, the second marriage was lawful." The Marquis, however, applied for and obtained an act of parliament confirming the marriage. But the act was repealed in the following reign (that of Mary). In the following reign of Elizabeth was renewed the endeavour (which had failed in the reign of Edward VI.) to frame such laws ecclesiastical as should be thought convenient, under the name of "Reformatio legum;" one of those laws, "de adulteriis et divortiis," allowed a marriage to be dissolved by the ecclesiastical judge for adultery, desertion, long absence, mortal enmities (shown in overt acts, such as threatening life), lasting cruelty of a husband towards his wife. In all these cases the innocent party, whether wife or husband, might marry again. Severe penalties were denounced against adulterers, and the divorce à menså et thoro was abolished, but this code of laws never received royal confirmation, and therefore did not become law, and the question whether a complete divorce could be decreed by any strictly legal tribunal remained undetermined until the year 1571, when it was decided in the "Star Chamber" (a tribunal, although most arbitrary and despotic, still of binding authority), in a case known as "Foljambe's case," that the second marriage of a husband divorced from his first wife by reason of her incontinency, was still a void marriage, because the first divorce was only à menså et thoro, and not à vinculo matrimonii, (that is, the bond of marriage), reverting to the old ecclesiastical theory-that a marriage could not be dissolved by the spiritual court, which alone had cognisance of the matter. In 1603, under the auspices of James I., the canons which still regulate and bind the clergy were enunciated. In one of them (the 107th) it is declared that parties separated à mensâ et thoro shall not during each other's life contract matrimony with another person, consequently any clergyman of the established church would, apart from any other legal consequences, have been amenable to ecclesiastical censure and punishment had he knowingly performed the ceremony of marriage where either of the parties to such marriage had been separated by a mere divorce à mensa et thoro.

To satisfy the scruples of the clergy, a proviso has been inserted in the act (20 & 21 Vict., c. 85, s. 57) that "no clergyman in holy orders of the United Church of England and Ireland shall be compelled to solemnise the marriage of any person whose former marriage may have been dissolved on the ground of his or her adultery, or shall be liable to any suit, &c., for refusing to solemnise the marriage of any such person." The next section provides that in the case of any minister's refusal any other minister may perform the service. In the reign of Charles II., a loose and profligate period of our history, the aid of the legislature was sought to enable Lord Roos, who had obtained a divorce à menså et thoro, to marry again. Although the bill was strongly opposed, it passed, but it is said by the historians (Burnett among others), that there was a strong political bias in its favour with reference to the king's being divorced and re-married, with a view to bar the Duke of York's succession to the crown. Here, however, the legislature did not dissolve the marriage, but about thirty years afterwards an actual dissolution of the nuptial tie was enacted in the case of the Countess of Macclesfield, the reputed, if not the actual, mother of Savage the poet. Three years after this followed' the Duke of Norfolk's case; and immediately afterwards that of a Mr. Rox. Thus the privilege was no longer confined to those in high places; the right to obtain an act "to dissolve a marriage and to enable the petitioner to marry again" (that is if the husband), became established, provided a person were rich enough to bear the costs of the application.

The causes admitted by various codes of laws as grounds for the suspension or dissolution of the contract of marriage, as well as the description of the tribunal which had, or in some degree has, jurisdiction over the proceedings, are various, and indicative of the degree of civilisation of the nations among whom they prevailed.

According to the law of Moses (Deut. xxiv. 1), "When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house." After ninety days, the wife might marry again; but after she had contracted a second marriage, though she should be again divorced, her former husband might not take her to be his wife. The form of a Jewish bill of divorcement is given by Selden, Uxor Ebraica,' lib. iii., ch. 24; and see Levi's Ceremonies of the Jews,' p. 146.

As the customs of Oriental nations do not change, we may conclude that the usages in the matter of divorce now existing in Arabia are the same, or nearly so, as when Mohammed endeavoured to reform them among the tribes for which he legislated. An Arab may divorce his wife on the slightest occasion: he has only to say to her, "Thou art divorced," and she becomes so. So easy and so common is this practice, that Burckhardt assures us that he has seen Arabs not more than 45 years of age who were known to have had 50 wives; yet the Arabs have rarely more than one wife at a time.

By the Mohammedan law, a man may divorce his wife orally and without any ceremony; when this is done, he pays her a portion, generally one-third of her dowry. He may divorce her twice, and take her again without her consent; but if he divorce her a third time, or put her away by a triple divorce conveyed in the same sentence, he cannot receive her again until she has been married and divorced ૨ ૨

Under such circumstances, therefore, the port authorities of the districts alluded to directed their attention to the creation of closed basins wherein the vessels might ride in safety; and it was at Liverpool that the first recorded great works of this description were executed, by the formation in the year 1710 of the dock at present known by the name of the Old Dock, and of the St. George's Dock, in 1762. The system thus inaugurated was found to be so advantageous that it was followed rapidly by other commercial towns, but it was not until the commencement of the present century that the metropolis of England followed the example; when, however, it did so, the great improvement of surrounding the basins with bonded warehouses was likewise introduced, and the complete modern system of docks was, for perhaps the first time, applied in the West India and the London Docks, respectively opened in 1802 and 1805. Nearly all the best modern docks have been constructed upon this system, and it has even been copied in foreign countries; for the Entrepôt Dock of the port of Havre, and the new docks of Marseille, are built with all the accessories to be found in the London establishments of this nature. Leaving out of account for the present the docks exclusively devoted to one particular class of traffic, such as the coal docks of the North of England and of Wales, it may suffice to say that in tidal rivers, where the variations in the height of the water are great, it is desirable to form, immediately behind the exit or the entrance lock gates a half-tide basin wherein vessels of small draught may lie until the level of the water on the outside shall rise to such a height as to allow of their movements being carried on. The entrance to the dock basin itself should be placed at the upper end of the half-tide basin; and it is desirable that all the locks should have double gates, pointing respectively up and down stream. If, in consequence of the Customs regulations of the country, it should be necessary to form import and export docks, it would also be desirable to place the gates leading to and from them at the upper end of the half-tide basin, which in such cases must be made wide enough to allow the various movements of the vessels to take place without their being crowded; and, as a general rule, it may be said that the import dock should be situated on the left and the export dock on the right-hand side. The basins, in such cases as supposed, should communicate at their upper ends only; and the vessels should, after being unloaded, be warped through the lock or communication channel to the berth where it is to take in its cargo. Notwithstanding some practical defects in its details, the plan of the West India Docks, as originally designed by the late Mr. J. Rennie, was one of the most logical of any which has been hitherto suggested-that is to say, for ports where the Customs regulations are rather vexatious-and as such it is here introduced.

If these leading principles are carefully borne in mind, the details of execution of a dock may be modified to suit local circumstances, and in such cases as Bristol, Ipswich, &c., the formation of these marvellous facilities to commerce may be made conducive to the improvement of the navigation itself. In both the cases mentioned, old branches of the rivers were operated upon, in which the stream naturally followed very tortuous courses, and thus lost a portion of its power of transmitting the tidal wave to the interior; by cutting new and straight courses for the streams, and by converting the old channels into closed basins, not only was a considerable area of water surface made available for the purposes of trade, but the "regimes" of the rivers were rendered more stable and better fitted for traffic purposes. There is a further advantage attending such a conversion of the bends of rivers, namely, that generally speaking in such cases it is possible to make locks at both ends of the chord of the arc formed respectively by the new cut and by the enclosed water surface; but it is impossible to lay down any invariable rule in a matter which must admit of so many modifications in consequence of the physical and commercial conditions of the places under consideration.

The only invariable laws with respect to the formation of docks appear to be that, 1st, the area of water surface should be as small as possible in proportion to the development of the quay walls. 2nd, If a simple parallelogram be the form adopted the width may be calcu

lated upon the principle that, at the maximum, three tiers of ships might lie alongside the quays on either side, and that there should be a sufficient space between the outer tiers to allow a vessel to swing round the widths and lengths which form the basis of this calculation would of course depend on the class of vessels frequenting the harbour or river. 3rd, The whole of the basins and of the warehouses, courts, yards, quays, &c., should be securely enclosed, both for the purposes of the fiscal relations of the port and for the protection of the merchandise there unloaded: it was, indeed, principally on account of the robberies committed on the Thames and in the warehouses alongside the river that the docks of London were originally proposed. 4th, The depth of water in the floating basin must be such as to allow the vessels to float at all times of the tides; in many cases, as at Havre, for instance, the necessity for observing this precaution has rendered it indispensable to sink the bottom of the basins considerably below the level of the bed of the sea in the outer harbour. It is desirable also, in order to avoid inconvenience from rapid silting up of the basins, to allow originally a depth rather in excess of that which is theoretically required. 5th, If the docks should be constructed in such positions as to allow vessels to sail directly into them, they must have an outer harbour sufficiently long and secure in which the vessels may loose their "way," or the impetus of advance, before they approach the half-tide basin or the inner lock.

The details of the quays, and of the sheds and warehouses, must depend upon the character of the trade at the particular place under consideration, and upon the customs regulations of the country. As a general rule it would, however, appear to be preferable to make, on the immediate edge of the quay, a paved road or gangway, of about 20 feet in width, without any roofing, and to place on this gangway the cranes for unloading or loading. It is found, indeed, that goods arriving from great distances, whether by land or by sea, require that their cases or envelopes should be examined and repaired before the goods are transmitted or shipped. This operation is sometimes known by the phrase coopering, and the open space above recommended, affords facilities for its execution, as well as for the operation known under the name of sampling, and for the examination by the custom house officers. Immediately beyond this open space it is customary to erect a shed of at least 30 or 40 feet clear width, in which goods for immediate delivery may lie for a few days, and in which the export goods may be received, if the regulations of the port should be such as to allow the ship to discharge, and receive, cargo on the same berth. The shed is usually succeeded by a wide road, of from 40 to 60 feet, along which the waggons engaged in the service of the dock can circulate; and beyond this road are the warehouses wherein goods are bonded or stored. These warehouses are usually made from 100 to 120 feet wide, and of from one to six stories in height, each of about 11 feet from floor to underside of beams, according to the description of goods they are intended to receive; for it may be as well here to state that tobacco is usually stored in sheds of only one story; sugar (especially the West Indian sugar) is stored in warehouses of three stories; wool is stored in those which have four stories; teas, silks, drugs, spices, &c., in warehouses of about five or six stories. Naturally, however, the number of stories will depend also to some extent upon the value of the ground, and the price of labour in the particular position; for as a general rule it is not desirable to concentrate too much merchandise of value under one roof. The settlement of these details of construction requires great skill, and an intimate knowledge of commercial affairs, in order to secure both economy of construction and of subsequent working.

It may be added that the area of warehouse floor occupied by the various classes of goods varies from 12 feet superficial per ton, of heavy goods, such as sugar in casks piled in two tiers, and including the necessary passages; to about 50 feet superficial per ton of wool, cotton, &c., also packed in two tiers. Wines and spirits are better kept in cellars than above ground; but wherever they are kept, precautions must be observed to maintain a constant temperature around them, and to prevent accidents by fire. In the London Docks, no artificial lights are allowed to be introduced into the spirit cellars or stores.

Beyond the warehouses thus described, it is desirable to form a roadway, at least 60 feet wide, for the waggons which are to receive the goods cleared for consumption, and for any connection with the general railway system of the country which may be desired. The whole of these roads, warehouses, basins, &c., should be surrounded by a wall of at least 20 feet in height.

The St. Katherine's Dock, and the Albert Dock of Liverpool, have been constructed upon principles rather different from those described above, for the warehouses are carried up perpendicularly from the edges of the quays, without any intermediate sheds and roads. This modification was rendered necessary, in the case of St. Katherine's Dock especially, by the extraordinary value of the land on which it was built; but unquestionably the manipulation of the merchandise, under these circumstances, is carried on at a greatly enhanced cost, and with great confusion. In the St. Katherine's Dock there are in some of the warehouses also seven stories (counting the entresol as one); but it is worthy of remark, that merchants have so great an objection to the use of the upper story that practically it is of no value. A very important condition to be observed in the construction of dock ware

goods discharged at once in lighters, over side, the dock authorities supply the necessary labour to the captains at a fixed tariff; but this operation is carried on entirely at the risk of the merchandise, and it must be performed with the rapidity required by the dock authorities. The rates usually charged for the use of docks are: 1. The landing rate, which includes the quay rate, the unloading and entry into the stores, or the stowage on the quay, and the loading upon carts if the goods are removed immediately from the Customs scales. 2. The consolidated rate, which includes the quay rate, the entry into stores, the examination and repair of casks and packages, the sampling, the weighing on delivery, the certificates of damage, and rent for three weeks from the day of breaking bulk. 3. The management rate, which is supposed to cover the expenses of showing the goods to purchasers, and of preparing them for sale. 4. The rent, payable by weeks, or by fractions of weeks. From observations made upon the application of the rates of the various London companies, it would seem that they are not very logically arranged, and that the rent, especially, does not cover the expenses connected with it. Generally speaking, however, it may be said that the working expenses of the London docks are equal to about 60 per cent. of their gross receipts, and that they pay, one with another, about 4 per cent. on the capital invested in them. It must, however, be here observed, that the trade connected with steam-boats does not pay the dock companies more than 2 per cent. profit under the ordinary tariffs, and that graving-docks never yield much more than 24 per

cent. on their outlay. The price of the Liverpool Docks was said to have ranged between 24,000l. and 36,000l. per acre of land inclosed; and in that port it is by no means rare to work as many as from 25,000 to 28,000 tons per acre of water surface per annum, while the proportion in London is only from 5000 to 6000 tons per acre. As an approximate rule, the floor surface of the warehouses may be calculated at the rate of 10 feet superficial for every ton in store; but, as was said before, no invariable rule can be applied in this case. Goods generally remain in warehouse for about three months; but the lighter and more valuable goods remain there the longest.

On account of the great security of the warehouses of the larger and wealthy dock companies, it has been possible to introduce a very important facility for commercial operations by the creation of a class of securities known as dock warrants. These are, in fact, acknowledgments on the part of the company that they hold and are responsible for certain quantities of goods specified on the warrant, which is then transmissible by endorsement, and the goods are deliverable to the last holder, unless notice to the contrary should have been legally given. [DOCK WARRANT.]

The system of business adopted at Liverpool is rather different from that of London, even when, as in the Albert Docks, the basins are surrounded by bonding-warehouses; for, as a general rule, the commerce of the former town is carried on by means of basins, and of private warehouses in the upper part of the town. In the new Victoria Docks

also, some modifications of a rather doubtful value have been introduced, which may be understood by reference to the accompanying cut. Almost every important port in England can now boast of its docks, and the details of them are so necessarily modified by local circumstances that it would be impossible to discuss them in a general article.

DOCK-WARRANTS, are orders by the owner of goods which are lying at a wharf or in a warehouse, upon the wharfinger or warehouseman, to deliver up the goods, or a named portion of them, to the person or persons in whose favour the orders are made. Then if the owner wishes to sell the goods, or portion of them, he may, by handing the dock-warrant to the buyer, made out in his favour, transfer to him the right of obtaining the goods from the wharfinger or warehouseman; so

the buyer, by endorsing to a sub-buyer, may transfer to him, and so on; but not so as to be enabled, without something more takes place, to bring an action against the wharfinger, &c., in case of refusal by him to deliver according to the warrant. These warrants, or delivery orders (as they are sometimes called), have the quality of securities, for they represent the goods themselves; and the warehouseman, accepting the order, and not refusing compliance on the ground that he holds the goods subject to an unsatisfied lien of his own against the original owner, or otherwise declining the order, becomes the agent of the buyer, and the buyer holding this order or warrant has the same right to go into the market and sell as if he had the goods in his pocket. Exceptions to, or modifications of, the rule may occur in cases of bankruptcy, insolvency, or when anything remains to be done with the