census. It should seem, however, that the jurors, in numerous instances, framed returns of a more extensive nature than were absolutely required by the king's precept, and it is perhaps on this account that we have different kinds of descriptions in different counties. From the space to which we are necessarily limited, it is impossible to go more minutely into the contents of this extraordinary record, to enlarge upon the classes of tenantry enumerated in it, the descriptions of land and other property therewith connected, the computations of money, the territorial jurisdictions and franchises, the tenures and services, the criminal and civil jurisdictions, the ecclesiastical matters, the historical and other particular events alluded to, or the illustrations of ancient manners, with information relating to all of which it abounds, exclusive of its particular and more immediate interest in the localities of the country for the county historian. For the adjustment of this Survey certain commissioners, called the king's justiciaries, were appointed. In folios 164 and 181 of the first volume we find them designated as "Legati Regis." Those for the midland counties at least, if not for all the districts, were Remigius, bishop of Lincoln, Walter Giffard, Earl of Buckingham, Henry de Ferrers, and Adam, the brother of Eudo Dapifer, who probably associated with them some principal person in each shire. These inquisitors, upon the oaths of the sheriffs, the lords of each manor, the presbyters of every church, the reves of every hundred, the bailiffs and six villains of every village, As an abstract of population it fails. were to inquire into the name of the The tenants in capite, including ecclesiplace, who held it in the time of King Ed-astical corporations, amounted scarcely to ward, who was the present possessor, how 1400; the under-tenants to somewhat less many hides in the manor, how many than 8000. The total population, as far carucates in demesne, how many ho- as it is given in the record itself, amounts magers, how many villains, how many to no more than 282,242 persons. In cotarii, how many servi, what free-men, Middlesex, pannage (payment for feeding) how many tenants in socage, what quan- is returned for 16,535, in Hertfordshire tity of wood, how much meadow and for 30,705, and in Essex for 92,991 hogs; pasture, what mills and fish-ponds, how yet not a single swineherd (a character much added or taken away, what the so well known in the Saxon times) is gross value in King Edward's time, what entered in these counties. In the Norman the present value, and how much each period, as can be proved from records, the free-man or soc-man had or has. All whole of Essex was, in a manner, one this was to be triply estimated: first, as continued forest; yet once only in that the estate was held in the time of the Con- county is a forester mentioned, in the fessor; then as it was bestowed by King entry concerning Writtle. Salt-works, William; and thirdly, as its value stood works for the production of lead and iron, at the formation of the Survey. The mills, vineyards, fisheries, trade, and the jurors were, moreover, to state whether manual arts, must have given occupation any advance could be made in the value. to thousands who are unrecorded in the Such are the exact terms of one of the survey; to say nothing of those who inquisitions for the formation of this Sur-tended the flocks and herds, the returns vey, still preserved in a register of the monastery of Ely. The writer of that part of the Saxon Chronicle which relates to the Conqueror's time, informs us, with some degree of asperity, that not a hide or yardland, not an ox, cow, or hog was omitted in the of which so greatly enlarge the pages of the second volume. In some counties we have no mention of a single priest, even where churches are found; and scarcely any inmate of a monastery is recorded beyond the abbot or abbess, who stands as a tenant in capite. These remarks might be extended, but they are sufficient for their purpose. They show that, in this point of view, the Domesday Survey is but a partial register. It was not intended to be a record of population further than was required for ascertaining the geld. There is one important fact, however, to be gathered from its entries. It shows in detail how long a time elapsed before England recovered from the violence attendant on the Norman Conquest. The annual value of property, it will be found, was much lessened as compared with the produce of estates in the time of Edward the Confessor. In general, at the survey, the king's lands were more highly rated than before the Conquest; and his rent from the burghs was greatly increased: a few also of the larger tenants in capite had improved their estates; but, on the whole, the rental of the kingdom was reduced, and twenty years after the Conquest the estates were, on an average, valued at little more than three-fourths of the former estimate. An instance appears in the county of Middlesex, where no Terra Regis, however, occurs. The first column, headed T. R. E., shows the value of the estates in the time of King Edward the Confessor; the second, the sums at which they were rated at the time of the survey, tempore Regis Willielmi :— Appeals to the decision of this Survey occur at a very early period. Peter of Blois notices an appeal of the monks of Croyland to it in the reign of Henry I. Others occur in the Abbreviatio Placitorum from the time of John downward. In later reigns the pleadings upon ancient demesne are extremely numerous; and the proof of ancient demesne still rests with the Domesday Survey. Other cases in which its evidence is yet appealed to in our courts of law, are in proving the antiquity of mills, and in setting up prescriptions in non decimando. By stat. 9 Edw. II., called Articuli Cleri, it was determined that prohibition should not lie upon demand of tithe for a new mill. The mill, therefore, which is found in Domesday must be presumed older than the 9th Edw. II., and is of course discharged, by its evidence, from tithe. On the discharge of abbey-lands from tithes, as proved by Domesday, it may be proper to state that Pope Paschal II., at an early period, exempted generally all the religious from paying tithes of lands in their own hands. This privilege was afterwards restrained to the four favoured orders, the Cistercians, the Templars, the Hospitallers, and the Premonstratensians. So it continued till the fourth Council of Lateran, in 1215, when the privilege was again restrained to such lands as the s. d. abbeys had at that time, and was declared not to extend to any after-purchased lands. And it extends only to lands dum propriis manibus coluntur. From the paucity of dates in early documents, the Domesday Survey is very frequently the only evidence which can be adduced that the lands claiming a discharge were vested in the monastery previous to the year expressed in the Lateran Council. T.R.W. £ 86 16 6 20 10 0 24 0 46 11 0 We shall now say a few words on the uses and consequences of the Survey. By its completion the king acquired an exact knowledge of the possessions of the crown. It afforded him the names of the landholders. It furnished him with the means of ascertaining the military strength of the country; and it pointed out the possibility of increasing the revenue in some cases, and of lessening the demands of the tax-collectors in others. It was moreover a register of appeal for those whose titles to their property might be disputed. Although in early times, Domesday, precious as it was always deemed, occasionally travelled, like other records, to distant parts, till 1696 it was usually kept with the king's seal, at Westminster, by the side of the Tally Court in the exchequer, under three locks and keys, in the charge of the auditor, the chamberlains, and deputy chamberlains of the exchequer. In the last-mentioned year it was deposited among other valuable records in the Chapter House, where it still remains. The two most important works for the student of the Domesday Survey are Kelham's Domesday Book illustrated, 8vo., London, 1788, and the General Introduction to the Survey, reprinted by command of his Majesty under the direction of the Commissioners on the Public Records, 2 vols. 8vo., 1833, accompanied by fresh indices. A translation of the whole, under the title of 'Dom-Boc,' was undertaken early in the present century by the Rev. William Bawdwen, Vicar of Hooton Pagnell, in Yorkshire, who published Yorkshire, with the counties of Derby, Nottingham, Rutland, and Lincoln, in 4to., Doncaster, 1809, followed by the counties of Middlesex, Hertford, Buckingham, Oxford, and Gloucester, 4to., Doncaster, 1812; but the work went no further. County portions of this record will be found translated in most of our provincial histories; the best are undoubtedly those in Dugdale's Warwickshire, Nichols's Leicestershire, Hutchins's Dorsetshire, Nash's Worcestershire, Bray and Manning's Surrey, and Clutterbuck's Hertfordshire. Mr. Henry Penruddocke Wyndham published Wiltshire, extracted from Domesday Book, 8vo., Salisb., 1788, and the Rev. Richard Warner, Hampshire, 4to., Lond., 1789. Warwickshire has been published recently by Mr. Reader. There are numerous other publications incidentally illustrative of Domesday topography, which the reader must seek for according to the county as to which he may desire information." DOMICILE. In the Roman law Domicile (Domicilium) was defined to be that place which a person "makes his family residence, and principal place of business; from which he does not depart unless some business requires: when he leaves it he considers himself a wanderer, and when he returns to it he deems himself no longer abroad." (Cod. lib. 10, tit. 39, 1, 7.) Similar definitions of the term are given by modern jurists. The constitution of domicile depends on the concurrence of two elements-1st, residence in a place; and, 2nd, the intention of the party to make that place his home. Domicile cannot be established except it be animo et facto, that is, actually and in intention also. It is some times not very easy to determine in what place a person actually has his domicile. It is obviously a question depending upon the evidence in each particular case, which is of course capable of every variety both in nature and degree. The evidence as to the place of residence is frequently far from clear; while the intention of the party has to be gathered from circumstances yet more difficult to come to a conclusion upon. The following rules appear to comprise the generally adopted principles on the subject: 1. The domicile of the parents is the domicile of the child. “Patris originem unusquisque sequitur." (Cod. lib. 10, tit. 31, 1, 36.) This is usually called the domicile of origin or nativity, and is in most cases the same with the place of birth. But the mere accident of birth in a place where the parents may happen to be in itinere, or on a visit, will have no effect in determining the domicile of origin. An illegitimate child, having no father in contemplation of law, follows the domicile of his mother. 2. Minors are generally considered incapable of changing, by their own act, the domicile of origin during their minority. If the father change his domicile, that of the children follows it; and if he dies, his last domicile will be that of his infant children. It has been much questioned whether the guardians of minors, idiots, or lunatics can change their domicile. It has been held in England that a mother, being guardian, might change the domicile of her children, provided it was not done for a fraudulent purpose, which would be presumed in the absence of any reasonable motive. In Scotland a minor, after the age of puberty, is not personally under the control of his guardian, and may change his domicile by his own act. 3. A married woman follows the domicile of her husband. 4. A widow retains the domicile of her late husband till she acquires another. 5. The place where a man resides is, for a great many purposes, to be considered his domicile, and, primâ facie, is to be taken to be so till other facts establish the contrary. 6. Every person of full age, who removes from one place to another, with the intention of making the latter his place of residence, immediately constitutes it his domicile. the colonies) is in legal effect the same as a domicile in England. 12. It was held in the Roman law that a man might, under certain circumstances, be said to have no domicile, as when he quits one place of residence with the intention of fixing himself in another. But this is not admitted in our law, in which, as before stated, it is held that the former domicile is not lost till the new one is acquired animo et facto. And in the possible case of a man of unknown origin acquiring two contemporaneous domiciles under the same circumstances, the lex loci rei site would probably prevail er necessitate in questions as to his personal property. 7. The domicile of origin must be considered to prevail till the party has not only acquired another, but manifested and carried into effect an intention of abandoning his former domicile, and abiding by another as his sole domicile. But the domicile of origin cannot be preserved by a mere floating intention of returning to it at some future period, or revived by a mere abandonment of the acquired domicile, unless perhaps where the party dies in itinere towards the intended domicile. "It is to be remembered," says Sir Wm. Scott (Lord Stowell), "that the native character easily reverts, and that it requires fewer circumstances to constitute domicile in the case of a native subject than to impress the national character on one who is originally of another country."quired 8. An acquired domicile is not lost by mere abandonment, but continues until a subsequent domicile is acquired, which 'can be done only animo et facto. 9. A married man's domicile is generally to be taken to be where the residence of his family is; unless this conclusion is controlled by circumstances, such as proof that he has altogether abandoned his family, or that their place of residence is temporary: but 10. If a man, whether married or not, has two places of residence at different times of the year, that will be esteemed his domicile which he himself selects, describes, or deems to be his home, or which appears to be the centre of his affairs; e. g. that of a nobleman or country gentleman, his residence in the countrythat of a merchant, his residence in town. 11. Residence in a place, to produce a change of domicile, must be voluntary. Thus, if it be produced by constraint, as by banishment, arrest, or imprisonment, it cannot affect the domicile. For the same reason a person abroad in the service of the state does not change his domicile. But it has been held that a Scotchman entering the service of the East India Company acquires a domicile in India, which (like a domicile acquired in any of Thus it appears that domicile, considered in relation to the civil status or the person, is of three kinds-1st, domicile of origin, depending on that of the parents at the time of birth; 2nd, domicile of choice, which is voluntarily acby the party; and, 3rd, domicile by operation of law, as that of a wife, arising from marriage. The word domicile is sometimes used in another sense, as signifying the length of residence required by the law of some countries for the purpose of founding jurisdiction in civil actions. In England every person, whether native or foreigner, who is for the time being within England, is amenable to the jurisdiction of its courts, and may sue or be sued in them; but in Scotland a residence of at least forty days within the country is necessary to establish jurisdiction ratione domicilii. (On the subject of Domicile, see Story's Commentaries on the Conflict of Laws, c. iii.) DONATIO MORTIS CAUSA, a gift made in prospect of death. The doctrine is derived from the Roman law, and a donation of this kind is defined in the Institutes (ii., tit. 7) as "a gift which is made under an apprehension of death, as when a thing is given upon condition that, if the donor die, the donee shall have it, but that the thing given shall be returned if the donor shall survive the danger which he apprehends, or shall repent that he has made the gift; or if the donee shall die before the donor." The definition of a “donatio mortis causa” in Fleta (ii. 57, De Testamentis) agrees almost | causa," that the Roman law did not reword for word with that of Ulpian (Dig. quire delivery, as the English law does, a 39, tit. 6, s. 2). Fleta's definition is, per- circumstance which restrains the power haps, taken from Bracton (ii. 26), who of making a "donatio mortis causa" by has adopted the words of Ulpian. In the the English law. It was long disputed English law it is necessary to the validity whether "donationes mortis causa" should of this gift that it be made by the donor be considered as legacies, or as other with relation to his dying by the illness gifts; but a constitution of Justinian which affects him at the time of the gift, (Cod. viii. tit. 57, s. 4) assimilated them but it takes effect only in case he die of in all respects to legacies, and declared that illness. There must be a delivery that they might be either made orally or of the thing itself to the donee; but in in writing, but it required four witnesses. cases where actual transfer is impossible, DONATIVE. [BENEFICE, p. 344.] as, for instance, goods of bulk deposited DOWAGER is a widow who is enin a warehouse, the delivery of the key dowed [DOWER]; but the term is often of the warehouse is effectual. This prin- applied to ladies of rank, whether they ciple is expounded by Lord Hardwicke, may be endowed or not. in the case of Ward v. Turner (2 Vez. 431). A donatio mortis causâ partakes of the nature of a legacy so far as to be liable to the debts of the donor, and, by 36 Geo. III. c. 53, §. 7, to the legacy duty; but as it takes effect from the delivery, and not by a testamentary act, it is not within the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts, and neither probate or administration is necessary, nor the assent of the executors, as in the case of a legacy. The English law of Donations, "mortis causa," is explained in Roper On Legacies, vol. i.; and in the judgment of Lord Hardwicke already referred to. See also Edwards v. Jones, 1 M. & C. 226; Duffield v. Elwes, 1 S. & S. 239. Ulpian (Dig. 39, tit. 6, s. 2) quotes Julian as laying down three forms of “donatio mortis causa:" first, when a man under no present danger of death, but solely influenced by a consideration of his mortality, makes a gift; second, when a man, moved by imminent danger of death, makes a gift, so that the thing becomes forthwith the property of the receiver; third, when a man, moved by danger, gives not so that the thing shall forthwith become the property of the receiver, but only in case of the death of the giver. But the third was the only proper kind of "donatio mortis causa." Any thing might be the subject of a "donatio mortis causa," as a piece of land, an agreement that a sum of money should be paid to the donee after the death of the giver, or a slave. It follows from the nature of the things that might be the subjects of a "donatio mortis The Queen Dowager is the widow of a king, and she has many of the privileges of a queen-consort. But it is not high treason to conspire to kill her; nor is it high treason to have sexual intercourse with her, as in the case of a queenconsort. The reason of the distinction in this second case is, that the succession to the crown is not endangered by sexual connection with her. It is said that a man cannot marry a queen-dowager without a licence from the king, under pain of forfeiting his lands and goods; but this may not be so now. By the Regency Bill of 1830 (1 Wm. IV. c. 2), the queen of William IV. would, if she had survived him, have been Regent of the United Kingdom, in case of his Majesty's demise and his leaving issue by the queen. The queen-dowager has now, by act of parliament (1 & 2 Wm. IV. c. 11), a pension of 100,000l., and also Mariborough House and the rangership of Bushy Park for life. DOWER is that part of the husband's lands, tenements, or hereditaments to which the wife is entitled for her life upon the husband's death. Prior to the reign of Charles II. five, and, until the passing of the act 3 & 4 Wm. IV. c. 105, there were four kinds of dower known to the English law. 1. Dower at the common law. |