[Footnote 293: LECKY, _Democracy and Liberty_, II, 214. There is already an immense literature relating to the question of marriage with a deceased wife's sister. The most complete bibliography of the subject is comprised in Mr. HUTH'S "Bibliography of Works on the Impediments to Marriage" appended to his _Marriage of Near Kin_, 393-449; also in part previously published by the _Index Society_, IV, 1st App. to 1st Report. In the _Church Quarterly Review_, XV, 426, may be found a table showing the results of the various attempts to pass the deceased wife's sister's bill during the period 1842-82. The absurdities and anomalies of the system are described in his trenchant manner by LECKY, _op. cit._, II, 214-23. With his account should be read the able discussion by HUTH, _op. cit._, 124-26. The peculiar arguments of the opponents of a change in the law, mainly resting upon the alleged authority of the Old Testament, are best seen in the two volumes of _Tracts Issued by the Mar. Law Defence Union_ (London, 1889); while the antidote may be found in T. PAYNTER ALLEN'S _Opinions of the Hebrew and Greek Professors of the European Universities_ (London, 1882), prepared for the Marriage Law Reform Association. The speeches in the two houses of Parliament in 1849, 1851, 1855, 1873, 1883, 1895, and whenever a bill on the subject has been under consideration, may of course be found in HANSARD'S _Parliamentary Debates_; and the _Report of the Royal Commission_ of 1848 (London, 1848) is especially important. A strong partisan in favor of the existing law is LUCKOCK, _Hist. of Marriage_, Part II, 213 ff., particularly 250 ff., 292 ff., 300 ff. For his and similar arguments from the standpoint of Hebrew law a partial remedy, on the homeopathic plan, is afforded by the curious essay of REV. GEORGE ZABRISKIE GRAY, _Husband and Wife_ (2d ed., Boston, 1886). Starting with the scriptural premise that man and wife are "one flesh," not "by his becoming part of her flesh, nor by both forming a new flesh, but by her entering into his flesh," the author, arguing with an ingenuity which would have done credit to Peter Lombard in his palmiest days, reaches the triumphant conclusion that a widower may properly marry his sister-in-law. In the same way he shows that by divine intent a woman may not divorce her husband under any circumstances, for "a member can not put away the head" (90); though she may "leave" him--secure a separation _a mensa et thoro_--if he is "cruel or unclean" (100).