to a nobleman. It is the opinion of some writers that the first admiral of all England was appointed in the year 1387. Even the officer bearing this title, however, was not then the person possessing the highest maritime jurisdiction. Above him there was the King's Lieutenant on the Sea (Locum tenens super mare). Also, before the term Admiral was used at all, there was an officer designated the Custos Maris, or Guardian of the Sea.

From the year 1405 (the sixth of Henry IV.) there is an uninterrupted series of Lord High Admirals of England, the office being always held by an individual, till the 20th of November, 1632, when it was for the first time put in commission: all the great officers of state were the commissioners. During the Commonwealth, the affairs of the navy were managed by a Committee of Parliament, till Cromwell took the direction of them himself. On the Restoration, the king's brother, the Duke of York, was appointed Lord High Admiral; and he retained the place till the 22nd of May 1684, when Charles took it into his own hands. On the duke's accession to the throne, in the beginning of the following year, he declared himself Lord High Admiral. On the Revolution the office was again put in commission; and it continued to be held in this form till 1707, when Prince George of Denmark was appointed Lord High Admiral, with a council of four persons to assist him. On his death in November, 1708, the Earl of Pembroke was appointed his successor, with a similar council. The earl resigned the office in 1709, since which time, till now, it has always been in commission, with the exception of the period of about sixteen months (from May 1827, till September 1828), during which it was held by King William IV., then Duke of Clarence. The Commissioners, styled the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, were formerly seven, and are now six in number; and the first lord is always a member of the cabinet. It is the first lord, indeed, who principally exercises the powers of the office. The patent constituting the commission is issued by writ of privy seal, in the king's name, and after mentioning the names of the commissioners, it appoints them to be" our commissioners for executing the office of our High Admiral of our said United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and of the dominions, islands, and territories thereunto belonging, and of our High Admiral of Jamaica, Barbadoes, Saint Christopher, Nevis, Montserrat, Bermudas, and Antegoa, in America, and of Guiney, Binny, and Angola, in Africa, and of the islands and dominions thereof, and also of all and singular our other foreign plantations, dominions, islands, and territories whatsoever, and places thereunto belonging, during our pleasure; giving, and by these presents granting unto you, our said commissioners, or any two or more of you, during our pleasure, full power and authority to do, execute, exercise, and perform all and every act, matter, and thing which do belong or appertain to the office of our High Admiral," &c., as well in those things which concern the navy as in the things which concern "the right and jurisdiction" of the High Admiral.

Till the reign of Queen Anne the salary of the Lord High Admiral was only 300 marks; and the emoluments of the place, which were very large, arose chiefly from perquisites, or droits, as they were called, of various descriptions. Prince George of Denmark resigned all these droits into the hands of the crown, and received in their stead a salary of 7000l. a year. The salary of the First Lord is 4500l., and his official residence is the Admiralty, Whitehall. The salary of the junior lords is 1000l., and they have official residences; or, in case of the government not appropriating to them an official residence, a sum of 2001. is allowed instead.

The title of Admiral is also given in modern times to naval officers of the highest rank; of which we have in England three classes, namely, Admirals of the Red, of the White, and of the Blue. Admirals bear their flag at the main top-gallant-mast head; vice-admirals, at the fore top-gallant-mast head; and rear-admirals, at the mizen top-gallantmast head. After the union with Scotland in 1707, the use of the red flag was discontinued, the union-jack being substituted for it; but it was resumed at the naval promotion which took place in 1805, after the battle of Trafalgar. There are also vice-admirals and rear-admirals of each flag, the former ranking with lieutenant-generals, and the latter with major-generals in the army. A full admiral ranks with a general, and an admiral who is actually the commander-in-chief of a fleet with a field-marshal. The title of Admiral of the Fleet is merely an honorary distinction. The sea-pay of the two admirals of the fleet, is 67. per day; admirals, 5l. per day; vice-admirals, 4l. per day; and rear-admirals, 31. per day. In addition to this pay, every commanderin-chief receives a further sum of 31. per day while his flag shall be flying within the limits of his station.

There is no officer with the title of admiral in the navy of the United States of America (one has just (1859) had this rank and title conferred for his life). The highest office is that of commodore, which is given to captains commanding on stations.

ADMIRALTY COURTS, in Law, are courts having jurisdiction over maritime causes, whether of a civil or criminal nature. In England, the Court of Admiralty is held before the Lord High Admiral or his deputy, who is the judge of the court: when there was a Lord High Admiral, the judge of the Admiralty usually held his place by patent from him; but when the office of admiral is executed by commissioners, he holds his place by commission under the great seal.

The Court of Admiralty is usually called the Instance Court, to

distinguish it from the Prize Court. The commissions to the judges are perfectly distinct, but are usually given to the same person. The Prize Court is only constituted n time of war. Neither is a Court of Record.

The Instance Court is usually held at Doctors'-Commons. The law it administers is composed of such parts of the civil law as treat of maritime affairs, together with the laws of Oleron and other maritime laws, and such alterations or amendments as have been introduced by Acts of Parliament, or usage which has received the sanction of legal decision. Its practice has been improved and its jurisdiction extended by the stat. 3 & 4 Vict. c. 65. An appeal from its judgments lies to the Queen in Council.

In criminal matters the Court of Admiralty has, partly by common law, partly by a variety of statutes, sole cognisance of piracy and all other indictable offences committed either upon the sea or on the coasts, beyond the limits of any English county (13 & 14 Vict. cc. 26, 27.) Its proceedings were according to the civil and maritime laws, until the statute 28 Henry VIII. c. 15 enacted that its proceedings should be according to the common law. The statute 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 28, next directed all offences tried in the Court of Admiralty to be punished in the same manner as if committed on land. A similar provision was made by 9 Geo. IV. c. 31. Ultimately, the Central Criminal Court in London was, by 4 & 5 Wm. IV. c. 36, empowered to determine offences committed within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty. By 7 & 8 Vict. c. 2, authority was given to the judges of assize and commissioners of oyer and terminer to try all offences within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty; so that, practically, the ordinary criminal courts now determine all prosecutions for offences within the Admiralty jurisdiction.

The civil jurisdiction of the Instance Court extends generally to marine contracts, that is, to such contracts as are made upon the seas,-as where the vessel is pledged during the voyage for necessary repairs; and to some few others, which, though entered into on land, are executed entirely upon the sea,-such as agreements for mariners' wages. If part of a cause of action arise on the seas and part on the land, the jurisdiction of the Admiralty Court is excluded. In contracts made abroad, they exercise in most cases a concurrent juris diction with the Courts of Common Law. The Admiralty Court has no cognizance of contracts under seal, except where, from the nature of the subject matter, it has exclusive jurisdiction; as in the case of an hypothecation bond, under which a ship is given in pledge for necessaries furnished to the master and mariners. This security binds the vessel on which the money is advanced. It imposes no personal contract on the borrower, and so does not fall within the cognizance of the common law. The Instance Court likewise regulates many other points of maritime right, such as disputes between part-owners of vessels, and questions relating to wreck and salvage. (9 & 10 Vict. c. 99.) It has also power to inquire into certain injuries committed on the high seas, such as collision, and in such cases to assess the damages to be paid to the party injured.

The Vice-Admiralty Courts established in our colonies are regulated by the 2 Wm. IV c. 51. They have a jurisdiction as to seamen's wages, pilotage, collisions, &c. (9 & 10 Vict. c. 99.) There is an appeal to the Queen in Council, that is, to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. (3 & 4 Wm. IV. c. 41.)

Offences committed on the sea may be dealt with in the colonies, as if the offence had been committed on waters within the local jurisdiction of the courts of the colony (12 & 13 Vict. c. 96. s. 1); and questions relating to the attack and capture of pirates may now also be determined in the Vice-Admiralty Courts abroad. (13 & 14 Vict. cc. 26, 27.)

The Prize Court is the only tribunal for deciding what is lawful prize, and for adjudicating upon all matters relating to prize. By prize' is understood every acquisition made jure belli (by the law of war), which is either itself of a maritime character, or is made, whether at sea or by land, by a naval force. All acquisitions by right of war belong, by the law of war, to the sovereign power in the state, but are usually, by the law of each particular state (as in England by several acts of Parliament), distributed in certain proportions among the persons who took or assisted in taking them. But agreeably to the law of nations, the property in the thing captured is not considered to be taken from the original owners until, by the sentence of a properly authorised court, it has been condemned as lawful prize. We have, as it should appear, no court authorised to adjudicate on property captured by land forces, or booty, as it is commonly termed by writers on the law of nations; but, when occasion requires (as when property to an immense amount was captured by the British army in the conquest of the Deccan), commissioners are specially appointed for the purpose. The 3 & 4 Vict. c. 65 enacts that the High Court of Admiralty shall have jurisdiction to decide all matters and questions concerning booty of war, that is, property captured by land-forces, when referred to it by the Privy Council. But property captured by the naval force forms the peculiar province of the Prize Court of the Admiralty. "The end of a Prize Court," says Lord Mansfield, "is to suspend the property till condemnation; to punish every sort of misbehaviour in the captors; to restore instantly, if upon the most summary examination there does not appear sufficient ground to condemn; finally, if the goods really are prize, against everybody, giving everybody a fair

opportunity of being heard." (Douglas's Reports, p. 572, &c.) The Prize Court has also jurisdiction in matters of capture in port or on land, when the capture has been effected by a naval force, or a mixed naval and military force. From prize causes, whether in the Court of Admiralty in England, or in the Vice-Admiralty Courts, an appeal lies directly to certain commissioners of appeal in prize causes, who are appointed by the crown under the great seal

Vessels taken under the treaties for the suppression of the slavetrade are adjudicated by a mixed commission, composed of English and foreign commissioners.

In 1840 an act was passed (3 & 4 Vict. c. 66) to make provision for the judge, registrar, and marshal of the Court of Admiralty. It fixes the salary of the judge at 4000l., with a retiring pension of 20001. after fifteen years' service, or on becoming permanently disabled from performing his duties. The salary of the registrar is 1400%., without fees. The registrar is appointed by the judge, and must be a proctor of not less than ten years' standing. One of the duties of the registrar is to attend the hearing of appeals before the Privy Council, instead of the registrars of the Court of Chancery, on whom this duty devolved under 3 & 4 Wm. IV. c. 41. On the next vacancy in the office of judge of the Admiralty, or judge of the Probate Court, these offices are to be united (20 & 21 Vict. c. 77).

66

All sovereign states which are engaged in maritime war, establish Admiralty Courts, for the trial of prizes taken by virtue of the commissions which they have granted. In determining prize cases, the Admiralty Courts proceed on certain general principles which are recognised among civilised nations. Thus the commission which empowers the Prize Court to determine cases of prize, requires it to proceed upon all and all manner of captures, seizures, prizes, and reprisals of ships and goods, which are or shall be taken, and to hear and determine according to the course of the Admiralty and the law of nations." The Court of Admiralty for Scotland was abolished by 1 Wm. IV. c. 69. The cases in their nature civil, formerly brought before this court, are now prosecuted in the Court of Session, or in that of the sheriff, in the same way as ordinary causes. The Court of Justiciary is the tribunal for the decision of the more important maritime offences. The inferior jurisdictions not dependent on the High Court of Admiralty were not abolished by the above act. (Burton's 'Manual of the Law of Scotland.') There is an Admiralty Court in Ireland, but a prize commissioner has never been sent to it. By s. 108 in the Corporations Reform Act (5 & 6 Wm. IV. c. 76) all chartered Admiralty jurisdictions were abolished; but that of the Cinque Ports, attached to the office of Lord Warden, was expressly reserved. (Stokes 'On the Colonies,' p. 357.)

(Dr. Browne's View of the Civil Law, and the Law of the Admiralty; Comyns's Digest, tit. Admiralty;' Blackst. Comm. Mr. Kerr's ed. iii. p. 76; iv. p. 314.)

ADMIRALTY, DROITS OF. [DROITS OF THE ADMIRALTY.] ADMISSIONS, in a suit in equity, are those facts necessary to support the case of a plaintiff, or of a defendant, the necessity of proving which is removed by the opposite party admitting them. Admissions are either, 1, Upon the record; or, 2, By agreement between the parties.

1. Admissions upon the record, again, are either Actual or Constructive.

Actual Admissions are those which appear in the bill or in the answer. A plaintiff cannot read any part of his bill in evidence, unless it is corroborated by the answer.

Of Constructive Admissions, the most ordinary instance is when a plea has been put in either to the whole or part of a bill; in which case the bill, or that part of it pleaded to, and not controverted by the plea, is admitted to be true.

A plaintiff may rest satisfied with the admission, and need not prove the fact not controverted by evidence.

Again, the statement of facts contained in a plaintiff's bill is in equity (but not at law) constructive admission as against him of the facts as stated, when the allegation is positive, as of his own acts, or of facts within his knowledge, but not when they are stated hypothetically, for the purpose of raising an answer to an anticipated defence, with a protest against their being considered as admitted; and the bill may be read as evidence of the facts so positively averred, not only in the suit in which the bill is filed, but in another suit.

There is a difference between actual and constructive admissions, in the manner in which they are presented to the court. The former are read to establish the case of the party reading them, in the same manner as the other evidence in the cause; the latter are stated to the court when the pleadings are opened, for the purpose of showing what are the matters in issue between the parties, and what are the facts which by the form of the pleadings they are precluded from disputing. In an answer, not only the simple admission of a fact, but the statement of a defendant that "he believes," or has been "informed, and believes" such a fact to be true, is sufficient, unless the statement be accompanied by some clause to prevent its being considered as an admission. The answer of an infant, being in fact the answer of his guardian, cannot be used against the infant. But the rule is different with respect to the answer of an idiot or lunatic put in by his com

mittee, or that of a person of weak intellect put in by his guardian. In these cases, admissions in the answers are evidence against them. The joint answer of a husband and wife may be read against them in matters relating to the wife's personal estate; but neither the joint answer, nor the separate answer of the husband, with relation to her inheritance. The answer of one defendant is not evidence against a co-defendant, unless where a defendant makes it so by referring to a statement in the answer of his co-defendant.

The courts of equity permit the plaintiff to read any portion of the answer which he thinks will support his case, provided that, in reading the admission of a fact, he reads at the same time any admissions or qualifications with which it is accompanied, and the whole of the passage in which the admission is contained. The rule is different in courts of law, in which, if an answer in equity is offered in evidence against a party, he has a right to insist upon the whole being read. 2. Admissions by agreement between the parties are those which the parties or their attorneys or solicitors agree upon between themselves, for the sake of saving expense or preventing delay. They are usually made in writing, and signed by the parties or their solicitors, but not necessarily so. Agreements for admissions will not be sanctioned by the court if they violate any known principles of law. Thus, there can be no agreement to waive an objection to an instrument for want of a stamp. (Daniell's Chancery Practice, by Headlam, 3rd. ed. vol. i. p. 669, et seq.)

ADMITTANCE. [COPYHOLD.]

ADOPTION (from adoptare) means taking by choice. By the Roman law, if a person had no children of his own, he might appoint any other person's, whether related to him or not, to be his children by adoption. In order to understand the ordinary mode of adoption and its legal effects, it must be remembered that the relation of father and son was very analogous to that of master and slave, both in the rights and duties attached to it, and in the manner in which it was dissolved. Hence, under the old law (that is prior to Justinian's time) if a person wished to adopt the son of another, the natural father sold the boy to him by a regular sale before a magistrate. In order that he might be emancipated from his father's authority, so as never to fall under it again, it was requisite that this sale should be repeated three several times. In strict accordance with the direction of the old law, which is thus laid down in the XII Tables, " Si pater filium ter venumduit filius a patre liber esto." [EMANCIPATION.] The father thus lost all his paternal rights over the child, who by this triple sale as regarded the purchaser, was put in mancipio, and did not become his filius familias until a fictitious suit or feigned recovery took place (called cessio in jure) when the child became, to all intents and purposes, a member of the family of his purchaser or adopter. If the person to be adopted was sui juris, that is, his own master, the mode of proceeding was by a bill (analogous to our private acts of parliament) proposed to the people in the comitia curiata. (Aul. Gell. Noct. Att.' v. 19, Cicero Pro Domo,' 29.) This was called Arrogation, from rogare, to propose a bill. In either case the adopted child became subject to the authority of his new father; passed into his family, name, and sacred rites, and succeeded to his property. Clodius, the enemy of Cicero, passed by this ceremony from the patrician to the plebeian rank, in order to qualify him to be tribune. (Cic. ' Pro Domo,' 12, 13; Suet. Tiber. Nero,' 2.)

The history of Rome abounds with instances of adoption. One of the sons of Paulus Emilius, the conqueror of Macedonia, was adopted by the son of Scipio Africanus the Elder, and having thus passed from the Emilian into the Cornelian gens, acquired the name of Publius Cornelius Scipio Emilianus, to point out the family of his birth and adoption; when he destroyed Carthage in the third Punic War, he received, like his adoptive grandfather, the appellation of Africanus, and is usually spoken of as Scipio Africanus the Younger.

Under the emperors the mode of adoption became the subject of reform; and that which for many ages could be effected only by a circuitous course of arbitrary forms, founded upon legal fictions, was allowed to be done by a short and simple process before a magistrate.

There was also a custom of adopting children by will, which was not only in vogue in the days of the Republic, but was even known in very ancient times, when it was not unusual for the Romans to adopt (adsci scere) their heredes sui or children into their nomina. (Cic. de Offic.' iii. 18; Corn. Nep. 'Offic.' c. 5; Suet. Jul.' 83; Tacit. 'Annal.' 3, 30; and Ovid, 'Metamorph.' xv. 818.) Julius Cæsar thus adopted his great nephew Octavius, who was thenceforth called Caius Julius Cæsar Octavianus, but is generally known under the appellation of Augustus, which he afterwards assumed. (Heineccius, Antiquitates Romanæ,' lib. i. tit. xi.) In like manner, several emperors adopted their successors; for instance, Augustus adopted his grandson Agrippa, and his step-son Tiberius. (Tacit. Ann.' i. 3; Suet.Aug.' 65.) So Tiberius, by the order of Augustus, adopted his nephew Germanicus, who died in the lifetime of Tiberius; and on the death of Tiberius, Caligula, the son of Germanicus, became emperor. At a subsequent period, Claudius went so far as to adopt his step-son Domitius, afterwards the Emperor Nero, to the exclusion of his own son Britannicus. Tacitus remarks, that Nero was the first stranger in blood ever adopted into the Claudian family. (Tacit. Annal.' xii. 25.). At various periods of Roman history

so great inconvenience was experienced in consequence of the general disinclination to marriage, that rewards were held out for its encouragement, and penalties imposed upon celibacy. Immunities from state burdens were given to those who possessed many children; and to obtain these, the adoption of children became a great abuse. Aulus Gellius, in his short notice of the legal forms and effects of adoption, cites an oration of P. Scipio the Censor, who complains of the custom prevalent in his time, that "an adoptive son should entitle his adoptive father to privileges in the state." (Aul. Gel. 'Noct. Att.' v. 19.) Under Julius Cæsar, after the wars, laws for the encouragement of population were proposed, but not carried into effect; but under Augustus the Julian law was proposed, A.U.c. 736, which contained heavy penalties upon celibacy, and proportionate rewards for the possession of children. This law was so unpopular, that, Suetonius says, it could not be executed. (Sueton. 'Aug.' 34.) Afterwards however a law passed, called from the consuls who introduced it, 'Lex Papia Poppaa,' by which, among other privileges given to those who possessed children, it was declared that, of candidates for prætorships and other offices, those should have the preference who had the greatest number of children. This occasioned what Tacitus calls, in speaking of the time of Nero, a 'pestilent abuse, which was practised by childless men, who, whenever the election of magistrates was at hand, provided themselves with sons by fraudulent adoptions; and afterwards, when in common with real fathers they had obtained prætorships, instantly released themselves from their adopted sons." The genuine fathers petitioned for relief, which produced a decree, that in the pursuit of any public employment whatever, no feigned adoptions should be of any avail, nor in taking estate by will. (See Tacit. Annal.' xv. 19.) The eleventh title of the first book of Justinian's 'Institutes' relates to adoption. There were then two kinds of adoption, one called arrogatio, when by a rescript of the emperor (principali rescripto), which had, it will be recollected, replaced the authority of the comitia, a person adopts another who is sui juris; the other, when by authority of the magistrate (imperio magistratus), he who is under the control of his parent (alieni juris) is made over to another person, and adopted by him either as his son, his grandson, or a relation in any inferior degree. Females might be adopted in the same manner. But when a man gave his child to be adopted by a stranger, the parental authority did not pass from the natural to the adoptive father; the only effect was, that the child succeeded to the inheritance of the latter if he died intestate. It was only when the adopter was the child's paternal or maternal grandfather, or otherwise in loco parentis, so that the right of nature concurred with that of adoption, that the new connection became the same as an original one. The adopter must in all cases have been at least eighteen years older than the person he adopted. Women, according to the laws of Justinian, were not entitled to adopt; but after having lost children by death, they might, by the indulgence of the emperor, be permitted to receive those of others in their place. A slave, on being named a son by his master before a magistrate, became free, but acquired no filial right.

The intimate connection between the Patria potestas and adoptio must never be lost sight of; because that explains the importance of the subject now under discussion, and the reason why its rules were so carefully and accurately developed; for adoption really was the act by which an individual was received into the position of a son or grandson, not so much from motives of affection on the adopter's part as from those of policy, enabling the adopter to acquire a patria potestas, and thus conferring by a fictitious parentage civil and agnate rights. Hence we may see the force of the expression, “Filios familias non solum natura verum et adoptiones faciunt" (D. 1, 7, 1); and " Adoptio non jus sanguinis, sed jus agnationis affert" (D. 1, 7, 23).

The German system of adoption is derived from the Roman law, though it cannot be said, according to the proper meaning of the word, to have been in force before the 15th or 16th century. Any adoption, in order to be strictly and properly a legal process, must take place before a court, or be confirmed by the proper authorities. The adopted son retains his family name, and prefixes or adds to it that of his adoptive father; but in case a nobleman adopts a commoner, the son does not succeed to the rank, unless it is confirmed by the sovereign. The more modern German institutes still keep to the principles of the Roman system of adoption, though the whole is modified so as to be more in harmony with German usages. The Prussian law does away with all distinction between adoption and arrogation; and allows the adopted son who is of age to manage his own property. The Austrian law does the same. Both also agree in requiring the age of the adoptive father to be fifty at least. The Prussian law, with respect to the adopted son, merely requires him to be younger than the father; while the Austrian code requires him to be eighteen years younger than the adoptive father. (Ersch and Gruber's Encyclopädie,' art. 'Adoption.')

The French law is to be found in the eighth title of the first book of the 'Code Civil.' Adoption is permitted to persons of either sex, provided they are above the age of fifty, having neither children nor other legitimate descendants, and being at least fifteen years older than the individual adopted. It can only be exercised in favour of one who has been an object of the adopter's constant care for at least six years during minority, or of one who has saved the life of the adopter in battle, from fire, or from drowning. In the latter cases, the only restriction respecting the age of

ARTS AND SCI. DIV. VOL. I.

the parties is, that the adopter shall be older than the adopted, and shall have attained his majority, or his twenty-first year, but he or she must also be without children or lawful descendants, and if married must obtain the consent of the conjunct. In every case the party adopted must be of the age ef twenty-one. The form is for the two parties to present themselves before the local judge (juge de paix) for the place where the adopter resides, and in his presence to execute an act of mutual consent; after which the transaction, before being accounted valid, must be approved of by the next superior court, the tribunal of first instance, within whose jurisdiction the domicile of the adopter is. The adopted takes the name of the adopter in addition to his own; and no marriage can take place between the adopter and either the adopted or his descendants, or between two adopted children of the same individual, or between the adopted and any child who may be afterwards born to the adopter, or between the one party and the wife of the other. The adopted acquires no right of succession to the property of any relatives of the adopter; but as to the property of the adopter he has the same rights as a child born in wedlock, and that, even although there should be other children of the latter description born after his adoption. It has been decided in the French courts that aliens cannot be adopted. Adoption is still practised among the Turks, and other eastern nations. It is common for a rich Turk, who has no children of his own, to adopt as his heir the child of persons even of the poorest class. The bargain is ratified before the Cadi, and their mutual consent recorded; after which the child cannot be disinherited by his adoptive father. D'Herbelot states, that, according to the law of Mohammed, a person becomes the adopted son of another by undergoing the ceremony of passing through his shirt; whence the expression, to draw another through one's shirt, signifies to adopt him for a son. In India the same thing is said to be frequently done by the two parties merely exchanging girdles. In the Code of Gentoo Laws published by Mr. Halhed, the 9th section of the 21st chapter is entitled 'Of Adoption.' The law permits a child under five years of age to be given up for adoption by its father for a payment of gold or rice, if he have other sons, on the parties going before a magistrate and having a jugg, or sacrifice, performed. A woman, however, it is added, may not adopt a child without having her husband's consent; and there is even some doubt if she may with that. 'He," concludes the law, "who has no son, or grandson, or grandson's son, or brother's son, shall (may?) adopt a son; and while he has one adopted son, he shall not adopt a second."

"

There is no Adoption in the English or Scottish system of law: though we find mention of it in Bracton 1. 2 c. 29 n. 4, 5 (but see Coke, 2 Inst.' 97). The courts have, however, recognised it as a matter of feeling and affection, in the case of seduction allowing an adopter to stand in loco parentis, and a compensation to be given, not only for mere loss of services, but also for the aggravated injury done to the object of affection. (Edmonson v. Machell, 2 T. R. 4; Irwin r. Dearman, 11 East. 23.)

ADULT-SCHOOLS are establishments for instructing in reading and other branches of knowledge, those persons who had not been educated in their youth. They were designed to meet the wishes of people who were no longer contented to remain uninstructed, and who did not think that the privation of an early education should necessarily entail upon them the evil of perpetual ignorance.

The first school avowedly established for the purpose of instructing adults, was formed in 1811, through the exertions of the Rev. T. Charles, a clergyman in Merionethshire. Some grown-up persons had previously attended his parish Sunday-school, but they showed a disinclination to learn with children, and this circumstance led to the adoption of more extended views for their benefit. Considerable success both in the number and progress of the pupils, and their improved conduct and character, caused the establishment of other adult-schools throughout Wales.

About the same time, and without any concert or connection with the schools in Wales, a school was established at Bristol through the instrumentality of W. Smith. This person," who collected the learners, engaged the teachers, and opened the two first schools in England for instructing adults exclusively, in borrowed rooms, and with borrowed books" (Pole's 'History and Origin of Adult Schools'), was the door-keeper to a dissenting chapel. He devoted three out of eighteen shillings, his weekly earnings, to defray the expense of giving to his brethren the means of studying the Scriptures, and of obtaining knowledge from other sources. A short time after these first efforts were made, a society was formed for the furtherance of his benevolent views. In the first report of this society, dated April, 1813, it was stated, that 222 men and 231 women were already receiving education. Adult-schools were soon afterwards established in different parts of the kingdom, at Uxbridge, Norwich, Ipswich, Sheffield, Salisbury, Plymouth, and other places.

The extension, however, and the great improvements made in the education of the young, seems to have interfered very materially with such schools as are mentioned above. Few, except under particular circumstances or the patronage of some benevolent individuals, now exist. What may now be called adult-schools are of a far higher character, and have been instituted to enable young men who have received the rudiments of an early education to continue their progress, either in particular departments or in general knowledge, in the hours

H

which they can spare from their business occupations. Of such a nature are the classes in various Mechanics' Institutes, the Crosby Hall evening classes for young men, at the Working Men's Colleges in Sheffield, at Salford, at Wolverhampton, and in Great Ormond Street, London; by the lectures to working-men given at the Geological Museum in Jermyn-street, the Edinburgh Apprentice Schools, and various other places of a similar character. These are very numerous, and productive no doubt of great advantage, not only to individuals but to society; there is, however, no record by which we can ascertain the numbers. The evening classes at King's College, London, are of a somewhat higher character, as giving the privilege of an university examination, and they are numerously attended. A great portion of those attending are young men, but not a few are men of middle age.

But though progress has thus far been made, there is yet a lamentable deficiency of education among the labouring classes. In 1856, there were 29 per cent. of the men, and 40 per cent. of the women, who could not write their names on their marriage. Still, this is an improvement in 1841, the per centage was 33 of the men, and 49 of the women. As the improvements in education are of course among the more youthful, it is to be expected that even the later numbers will now rapidly decrease. The number of persons who could not write their names in the marriage register of 1856, indicates the state of education some twelve or fifteen years earlier.

ADULTERATION (from the Latin Adulteratio) is the use of ingredients, in the production of any article, which are cheaper and not so good, or which are not considered so desirable by the consumer, as other or genuine ingredients for which they are substituted. The sense of the Latin word is the same. (Pliny, 'Hist. Nat.' xxi. 6.) The law does not consider adulteration generally as an offence, but relies apparently on an evil of this nature being corrected by the discrimination and good sense of the public. The selling of unwholesome provisions, as meat or fish, is generally punishable under local acts. The 51 Hen. III. st. 6 prohibited the sale of unwholesome flesh, or flesh bought of a Jew, under pain of fine and imprisonment. In Paris, malpractices connected with the adulteration of food are investigated by the Conseil de Salubrité, acting under the authority of the prefect of police. In this country, strict regulations have been resorted to in order to prevent adulteration.

Tobacco-manufacturers are liable to a penalty of 2001. for having in their possession sugar, molasses, honey, roots of malt, ground or unground roasted grain, ground or unground chicory, lime, ochre, or other earths, sea-weed, ground or powdered wood, moss or weeds, or any leaves, or any herbs or any substance, syrup, liquid or preparation, capable of being used as a substitute for, or to increase the weight of, tobacco or snuff (5 & 6 Vict. c. 93, § 5). Any person engaged in the preparation of articles to imitate tobacco or snuff, or who shall sell such articles to any tobacco-manufacturer, is liable to a penalty of 2007. (§ 8). The penalty for adulterating tobacco or snuff is 300l. (§ 1); and for having such tobacco or snuff in possession, 2001. (§ 3). The tade in tobacco as to licences, &c., is regulated by the above-mentioned statute, and the 3 & 4 Vict. c. 18.

The ingredients used in the adulteration of beer are enumerated in the list of articles which brewers or dealers in beer are prohibited from having in their possession under a penalty of 2001. (56 Geo. III. c. 58, § 2). These articles are molasses, honey, liquorice, vitriol, quassia, cocculus Indicus, grains of Paradise, Guinea pepper, and opium. Preparations from these articles are also prohibited. They are used as substitutes for hops, or to give a colour to the liquor in imitation of that which it would receive from the use of genuine ingredients; § 3 of the act imposes a penalty of 500l. upon any chemist, or other person, who shall sell the articles mentioned to any brewer or dealer in beer. The penalties against dealers are extended to beer-retailers under the 11 Geo. IV. and 1 Wm. IV. c. 64, and 4 & 5 Wm. IV. c. 85, which contain special provisions against adulteration applicable to this class of dealers. These provisions are continued and extended by the 3 & 4 Vict. c. 61. The 5 & 6 Vict. c. 30, makes regulations for the preparation and use of roasted malt in brewing, and the 10 Vict. c. 5, 13 & 14 Vict. c. 67, and 17 & 18 Vict. c. 30 allow sugar to be used, subject to regulations of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue.

Selling corrupted wine' is punishable under the 51 Hen. III. st. 6. By the 12 Car. II. c. 25, the adulterating of wine is punishable with a fine of 100%. on the merchant, 40l. on the vintner; and additional regulations are made by 1 Wm. & M. st. 1. c. 39.

Tea, another important article of revenue, is protected from adulteration by several statutes. The act 11 Geo. I. c. 30, § 5, renders a teadealer liable to a penalty of 100l. who shall counterfeit, adulterate, or manufacture any tea, or mix with tea any leaves other than leaves of tea (§ 5). Under 4 Geo. IV. c. 14, tea-dealers who dye, fabricate, or manufacture any sloe-leaves, liquorice-leaves, or the leaves of tea that have been used, or other leaves in imitation of tea; or use terra japonica, sugar, molasses, clay, logwood, or other ingredients, to colour or dye such leaves; or sell or have in their possession such adulterated tea, are liable to a penalty of 101. for every pound of such adulterated tea found in their possession (§ 11). The 17 Geo. III. c. 29, also prohibits adulteration of tea (§ 1).

The adulteration of coffee and cocoa is punished under 43 Geo. III. c. 129. Any person who manufactures, has in his possession, or sells burnt, scorched, or roasted peas, beans, grains, or other grain or

vegetable substance prepared as substitutes for coffee or cocoa, is liable to a penalty of 100l. (§ 5). The object of § 9 of 11 Geo. IV. c. 30, is similar. Chicory is extensively used in the adulteration of coffee. This root came into use on the Continent in consequence of Bonaparte's decrees excluding colonial produce, and coffee with which a fourth or a fifth part of chicory has been mixed is by some persons preferred as a beverage to coffee alone. The Excise has for some time permitted the mixture of chicory with coffee. Besides the quantity imported, chicory is also grown in England.

The manufacturer, possessor, or seller of adulterated pepper is liable to a penalty of 100l. (59 Geo. III. c. 53, § 22).

The act 9 Geo. IV. c. 44, § 4, extends the various acts relative to the excise on tea, coffee, cocoa, pepper, &c., to the United Kingdom.

All penalties prosecuted by the Excise are by § 2 of the same statute to be recovered according to 8 Geo. IV. c. 53 (see 12 & 13 Vict. c. 1); but if they are incurred within the limits of the chief office of Inland Revenue in London, the information may, by the 15 & 16 Vict. c. 61, be determined by justices of the peace.

As regards the important article of bread, the act 6 & 7 Wm. IV. c. 37 (which repealed the several acts then in force relating to bread sold beyond the city and liberties of London, and ten miles of the Royal Exchange), was also intended to prevent the adulteration of meal, flour, and bread beyond these limits. No other ingredient is to be used in making bread for sale except flour or meal of wheat, barley, rye, oats, buckwheat, Indian corn, peas, beans, rice, or potatoes, mixed with common salt, pure water, eggs, milk, barm, leaven, potato or other yeast, in such proportions as the bakers think fit (§ 2). Adulterating bread, by mixing other ingredients, is punishable by a fine of not less than 51. nor above 10., or imprisonment not exceeding six months: and the names of the offenders are to be published in a local newspaper (§ 8). Adulterating corn, meal, or flour, or selling flour of one sort of corn as flour of another sort, subjects the offender to a penalty not exceeding 201. and not less than 51. (§ 9). The premises of bakers may be searched, and if ingredients for adulterating meal or flour be found, the penalty for the first offence is 10l. and not less than 40s.; for the second offence 5l., and for every subsequent offence, 102.; and the names of offenders are to be published in the newspapers (§ 12). There are penalties for obstructing search (§ 13). Any miller, mealman, or baker acting as a justice under this statute, incurs a penalty of 1007. (§ 15).

The above act did not apply to Ireland, where the baking trade was regulated by an act (2 Wm. IV. c. 31), the first clause of which, relating to the ingredients to be used, was similar to the English act just quoted. In 1838 another act was passed (1 Vict. c. 28), which repealed all former acts relating to the sale of bread in Ireland. The preamble recited that the act 6 and 7 Wm. IV. c. 37, had been found beneficial in Great Britain; and the clauses respecting adulteration are similar to the English act.

The several acts for regulating the making of bread within ten miles of the Royal Exchange (which district is excluded from the operation of 6 & 7 Wm. IV.) were consolidated by the act 3 Geo. IV. c. cvi. Under this act any baker who uses alum, or any other unwholesome ingredient, is liable to the penalties mentioned in § 12 of 6 & 7 Wm. IV. c. 37. Any ingredient or mixture found within the house, mill, stall, shop, &c. of any miller, mealman, or baker, and which shall appear to have been placed there for the purpose of adulteration, renders him liable to similar penalties.

Other articles besides those which have been mentioned are adulterated to a great extent, and there is scarcely an article, from arrowroot to guano, which escapes. The interference of Government with the practice of adulteration, except in the case of bread and drugs [APOTHECARIES' COMPANY], has had no other object than the improvement of the revenue.

Adulteration and the deceitful making up of commodities attracted the attention of the legislature in the 16th century, and several acts were passed for restraining offences of this nature.

ADULTERY, the offence of incontinence between two married persons, or between two persons, one of whom is married. In the latter case it is called single, in the former, double adultery. (Cowel, 4.)

This crime was punished by the Jewish law with death; but the adultery which by the Mosaic law constituted a capital crime, was not every violation of chastity of which a married person might be guilty, but only the sexual connection of a wife with any other man than her husband. This distinction was part of the Jewish marriage-law, by which the husband and wife had not an equal right to restrain each other from infidelity. The former might marry other wives, or take concubines and slaves to his bed, without giving his first wife a right to complain of any infringement of her matrimonial rights. The punishment, however, of incontinence in a married woman with a stranger, was, by the Levitical law, death by stoning, both in the case of the stranger and the adulteress. (Levit. xx. 10, and Michaelis, Mosäisches Recht.') By the Athenian law, the husband might kill the adulterer, if he detected him in the act of dishonouring him. (Lysias's Oration on the Death of Eratosthenes.')

The Roman corresponds with the Hebrew law. Civilians define adultery to be the violation of another man's bed (violatio tori alieni); so that the infidelity of a husband could not constitute the offence. The more ancient laws of Rome, extremely severe against the offence

of the wife, were silent as to that of the husband. By an old law, an adulteress was to be slain by her husband and his relations (adulterii convictam vir et cognati uti volent necanto). At a later period, by the Lex Julia (Dig., 1. 48, t. 5; Paulus, Sentent. Recept. ii. 26), passed in the time of Augustus, about 17 B.C., adultery in the wife was punishable by banishment; she forfeited half her dowry and a third part of her property. The adulterer forfeited half his goods to the public use, and was also banished. But although by the Julian law adultery was not punishable with death by legal sentence, the father, natural or adoptive, of the adulteress was in some cases permitted to kill both her and her paramour; and in some cases the husband had the same power. A constitution of Constantine made adultery a capital offence in the male. (Cod. ix. t. 30.) Justinian (Novel. 134, c. 10) confirmed the law of Constantine, and added confinement in a convent as the punishment of the adulteress, after she had been whipped.

at all.

By the canon law, now more or less interwoven into the municipal laws of most Christian countries, adultery is defined to be the violation of conjugal fidelity. Consequently, incontinency in the wife or the husband stand on the same foundation. Hence arises the distinction between single and double adultery, already alluded to, which are punishable in various ways in most of the countries of modern Europe, but in none of them, at the present day, is either of these offences capital, and in few of them, in fact, is the public offence punished There are faint traces of the punishment of adultery as a crime in the early periods of the history of English law. Lord Coke says that in ancient times it was within the jurisdiction of the sheriff's tourns and court-leet, and was punished by fine and imprisonment (3 Inst. 306); but at the present day adultery is not the subject of criminal prosecution. Till quite recently it was only cognisable as an offence in the Ecclesiastical Courts; but instances of criminal prosecutions there are extremely rare. If instituted and followed out to the conviction of the parties, the infliction of a slight fine or penance " for the benefit of the offender's soul" (in salutem anima), as it is termed, would be the only result. In 1604 (2 James I.) a bill was brought into Parliament "for better repressing the detestable crime of adultery," but it was dropped. (Parl. History, vol. v. p. 88.) During the Commonwealth, adultery in either sex was made a capital felony (Scobel's 'Acts,' part ii. p. 121); at the Restoration this law was discontinued. Adultery however, till the erection of the Court for Divorce [DIVORCE], came under the cognisance of the temporal courts in England as a private injury to the husband. A man might maintain an action against the seducer of his wife, in which he might recover damages as a compensation for the loss of her services and affection in consequence of the adultery. This was felt to be a scandal and a reproach to the law of England, and the action of crim. con. was accordingly abolished (20 & 21 Vict. c. 85), "but by an unpardonable omission in legislation, this is accomplished in words only, whilst in effect-indeed in words equally plain-a similar right of action is given to the husband through the instrumentality of the Court, but to be tried by a jury. A man may now recover damages for his wife's infidelity without seeking for a divorce, but may continue to live with her upon the damages recovered from the paramour, which may be settled upon her and upon the children. Even when a divorce is obtained, the damages may be settled upon the children of the marriage; and the father may live with his children whilst they are maintained and educated with the price of their mother's dishonour." (Lord St. Leonard's, ' Handy Book,' p. 77.)

In Scotland, the Act 1563, c. 74, punished the notorious and habitual adulterer, man or woman, with death. The latest instance of sentence of death in Scotland for adultery is perhaps that of Margaret Thomson, May 28, 1677. All the statutes on the subject have, according to the peculiar practice of Scotland, expired by long desuetude. In the 17th and the commencement of the 18th century, the church courts were very active in requiring the civil magistrate to adjudicate in this offence; but this means of punishment was rendered nugatory by the 10th Anne c. 7, § 10 (the Toleration Act), which prohibited civil magistrates from giving effect to ecclesiastical censures. Of late years the doctrine has been admitted by Scottish lawyers, that the seduction of a wife is good ground for an action of damages; but such prosecutions are wholly unknown in practice. Adultery alone is in Scotland a good ground on which to obtain a divorce. (Hume, 'On Crimes,' i. 452-458; Stair's Institutes,' b. i. tit. 4, s. 7; Erskine's 'Institutes,' b. i. tit. 6, B. 43.) The French law (Code Pénal) makes it excusable homicide if the husband kill the wife and the adulterer in the act of adultery in his own house. The punishment of a woman convicted of adultery is imprisonment for not less than three months, and not exceeding two years; but the prosecution can only be instituted at the suit of the husband; and the sentence may be abated on his consenting to take back the wife. The paramour of a wife convicted of adultery is liable to imprisonment for not less than three months, or for a period not exceeding two years; and to a penalty of not less than 100 francs, or not exceeding 2000 francs.

In the state of New York, the Court of Chancery is empowered to pronounce a complete divorce in the case of adultery, and in no other cases, upon the complaint either of the husband or the wife. The process is by bill filed by the complaining party. If a divorce is pro

nounced, the defendant is disabled from marrying during the lifetime of the other party. ADVENT, literally, the approach or coming, is the space of four weeks preceding Christmas, appointed in the English and other Christian Churches to be kept holy in celebration of the approach of our Saviour's nativity or manifestation. Anciently, the season of Advent consisted of six weeks, and, commencing therefore about Martinmas, used to be called the Sancti Martini Quadragesima, or the Forty Days' Lent of St. Martin. It is still of this duration in the Greek Church. The first Sunday in Advent, commonly called Advent Sunday, is now the Sunday, whether before or after, which falls nearest to St. Andrew's day (the 30th of November).

ADVENTURE, BILL OF, a writing signed by a merchant, stating that the property of goods shipped in his name belongs to another, the adventure or chance of which the person so named is to stand, with a covenant from the merchant to account to him for the produce. In commerce an adventure' is a speculation in goods sent abroad under the care of a supercargo, to dispose of to the best advantage to his employers.

ADVERB, in grammar, the name given to a class of words employed with verbs, adjectives, &c., for the purpose of qualifying their meaning, just as the adjective itself is attached to substantives. In the English language a very large majority of adverbs are distinguished by the termination ly, which in the Anglo-Saxon has the fuller form lice, and in German, lich. Our own language possesses the same suffix in the form like, as godlike, gentlemanlike. These, however, and many other words in ly, are adjectives, as manly, ugly; and it is difficult to draw the line between these two classes, many words, especially in the older writers, being used indifferently for both [ADJECTIVE]. The word to which the adverbial suffix ly is added is generally an adjective, but occasionally the adjective has become obsolete in the present form of our language, and must be sought in the Anglo-Saxon. Thus early is derived from the Anglo-Saxon aer, which indeed still appears in the now poetical forms ere, and the superlative erst. But though the termination ly is derived from the Teutonic portion of our language, it has been applied most freely to adjectives of Latin origin, as publicly, privately; and with these may be classed the adverbs from adjectives in ble, as horribly, agreeably, in which the liquid belongs at once to the adjective and the suffix. An important class of adverbs are formed by prefixing the old Saxon preposition an or on to nouns, in which a careless pronunciation afterwards left nothing but the vowel a, as on fote, now a-foot. Lastly, we have an interesting though ludicrous formation depending upon alliteration, helter-skelter, hurry-skurry, pell-mell, higgledy-piggledy, &c. The same love of alliteration, which is said to have formed an important element in Anglo-Saxon versification, has also given rise to some adjectives and substantives, as hum-drum, slip-slop, tip-top, tittle-tattle, hurly-burly.

ADVERTISEMENT, from the French avertissement, which means an announcement or notice of any kind, is the general name of those announcements published in newspapers, magazines, and other works appearing periodically, whatever be their peculiar character. The first English advertisement which can be found, is in the 'Impartial Intelligencer,' for 1649, and relates to stolen horses. In the few papers published from the time of the Restoration to the imposition of the Stamp Duty, in 1712, the price of a short advertisement appears seldom to have exceeded a shilling, and to have been sometimes as low as sixpence. [Nichols's 'Literary Anecdotes,' vol. iv.] The practice of advertising soon began to increase, till the tax was imposed upon advertisements in 1712. This might check, but could not stop, the increase of a practice found to be so advantageous in all commercial transactions as well as in many other affairs. Advertisements continued to multiply, not only in number, but in the organs through which they were diffused, and soon began to be not only a considerable means of support to the medium in which they appeared, especially to the newspapers, but a source of revenue to the country. The tax on each advertisement, whatever its length, was formerly 3s. 6d.; and in the year 1832, the total number of newspaper advertisements in the United Kingdom was 921,943, viz., 787,649 in England, 108,914 in Scotland, and 125,380 in Ireland-the duty amounting to 172,570l. But the tax was felt to be an unfair and an oppressive one, and the number and the amount continued nearly stationary for several years. In 1833, therefore, the act of 3 and 4 Wm. IV. cap. 23, passed June 28, reduced the duty to 18. 6d. on each advertisement in England, and to 18. in Ireland, the loss to the revenue being estimated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at 70,000l. Advertising again took a start, and in 1841 the total number of advertisements in the United Kingdom amounted to 1,778,957, and the duty to 128,318. The income thus derived to the newspapers was largely expended in improving them; their size was universally enlarged, in some cases doubled; and as the number of newspapers did not materially increase, the circulation also doubled. The Times,' which had been for many years a large advertising paper, contained 1474 superficial square inches of print on each side, and in 1836 it commenced issuing supplementary sheets, frequently of equal size, and at other times of half that size. In 1845 during nine weeks from Sept. 6 to Nov. 1, it was stated in an interesting article on the curiosities of advertising, in Vol. xcvii. of the Quarterly Review,' that the receipts of the Times' for advertisements were 44,0567. On Aug. 4, 1853, by the 16 &