In these days, however, when the supremacy of law is universally recognised, such an informal process cannot be tolerated; and formalities as full as at marriage must be gone through. For divorce in its simplest form judicial intervention is not needed. It is enough that the parties agree to separate. All that is necessary is to make a declaration attested by two reputable witnesses at the local office that the divorce takes place by mutual consent. If there is sufficient cause which would be recognised by a court of justice, the offending party would readily consent to this form of divorce, for few people would care to wash their soiled linen in public when the same end could be gained more quietly in private. Hence, judicial divorces are comparatively rare. The attestation of two witnesses is of considerable use in preventing rash divorces made in a moment of passion and repented immediately after, as the witnesses who may be expected to be cooler-headed than the principals, would do their best to patch up the quarrel or difference before finally setting their seal and signature to the deed of divorce. Moreover, if the parties are under twenty-five years of age, they must obtain the consent of those persons, that is, parents, guardians, or family councils, whose consent would be necessary for a marriage in which the bride is under twenty-five years of age and the bridegroom under thirty. In a divorce the domicile of the wife or the adopted husband is re-transferred from the domicile of the family into which they were married to that of their original family; the process is reverse of that required upon marriage. In a divorce by mutual consent the request for re-transfer is voluntarily made by the parties concerned, while in a judicial divorce, since the appeal to law is made in consequence of the refusal of one of the parties to sign the request to the local office, the re-transfer is made by order of the court.