“To argue the matter on the legal points in opposition to the
disinterested and well-reasoned despatch of the French Minister was a
hopeless task. In an elaborate state-paper, Mr Seward, the American
Secretary of State, professed to rest the surrender of the
Commissioners upon a mere technicality—that there had been no formal
condemnation of the Trent by a prize-court; but, apart from this point
of form, the seizure was indefensible on the merits as a flagrant
violation of the law of nations; and if the principle was not so
frankly acknowledged by Mr Seward as it ought to have been, some
allowance must be made for a statesman who was trammelled by the
report of his colleague, Mr Welles, the Secretary of the Navy,
approving of Captain Wilkes’s conduct, and still more by the necessity
of adopting a policy directly contrary to the whole current of popular
opinion in the Northern States.”
The law of marriage and of divorce is very fully treated by Lord
Mackenzie, and the peculiarities of the different European systems are
well pointed out. The subject, however, is too extensive and important
to admit of being incidentally noticed; and we shall confine our
extracts here to a single passage describing a Roman form of
cohabitation less honourable than matrimony, and such as we trust is
never likely, to be legalised among ourselves:—
“Under Augustus, concubinage—the permanent cohabitation of an
unmarried man with an unmarried woman—was authorised by law. The man
who had a lawful wife could not take a concubine; neither was any man
permitted to take as a concubine the wife of another man, or to have
more than one concubine at the same time. A breach of these
regulations was always condemned, and fell under the head of
_stuprum_. In later times the concubine was called _amica_. Between
persons of unequal rank concubinage was not uncommon; and sometimes it
was resorted to by widowers who had already lawful children and did
not wish to contract another legal marriage, as in the cases of
Vespasian, Antoninus Pius, and M. Aurelius.
“As regards the father, the children born in concubinage were not
under his power, and were not entitled to succeed as children by a
legal marriage; but they had an acknowledged father, and could demand
support from him, besides exercising other rights. As regards the
mother, their rights of succession were as extensive as those of her
lawful children.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account