[33] Ringrose, “Marriage and Divorce Laws,” p. 9. We find from the second chapter of the Gospel of St. John that Jesus, himself, attended a marriage in Cana of Galilee, but performed no religious ceremony. [34] II. Pollock and Maitland’s History English Law, 366. [35] _Ante idem._ vol. I., p. 158; Letters of John of Salisbury, i, 124. [36] _Ante idem._ Under the Twelve Tables, enacted B. C. 449, a marriage, in Rome, could be contracted without any formality, by the consent of the parties alone. Bryce, “Marriage and Divorce,” III. Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, p. 786. [37] Glanville, vii, 13, 14; Select Civil Pleas, pl. 15, 92, 109. [38] II. Pollock and Maitland’s History English Law, p. 371. [39] Compiliato Prima, lib. 4, tit. c. 6. [40] II. Pollock and Maitland’s History English Law, 372. [41] Calendarium Genealogicum, i, 57. [42] Atlantic Monthly, for 1888, vol. 61, pp. 521, 527. [43] _Ante idem._ [44] Atlantic Monthly, for 1888, vol. 61, p. 521. [45] 26 George II., c. 33. [46] Bryce, “Marriage and Divorce,” III. Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, p. 815. The statute of the 26’ year of George II., enacted that wedding banns should be regularly published three successive Sundays in the church of the parish where the parties were for the time residing. This statute was passed to prevent the evils of the “Fleet marriages,” during the year 1616, when the Rector of St. James was suspended and clerical men living within the Rules of the Fleet, solicited passers-by for patronage and celebrated marriage ceremonies in ale-houses and garrets, without the publication of banns, or the existence of marriage licenses. Wood’s “Wedding Day in All Ages,” vol. II., page 235. [47] 10 Clark and Finley, 534. [48] Pollock and Maitland, in their History of English Law, say that this erroneous decision may have pleased the Lords, but the opposite holding will be followed by historians of the middles ages. (Vol. II., p. 372.) And James Bryce, in his “Marriage and Divorce,” III. Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, says that this “seems to have been an erroneous” decision. (Vol. III., p. 815.) [49] Bracton, f. 92, 304, 305; Note Book, pl. 891, 1669. [50] Bracton, f. 63; Bliss, Calendar of Papal Registers, i, 254; Year Book, 11-12 Edward III., p. 481. [51] Statute West, II., c. 34; Second Inst. 433. [52] II. Pollock and Maitland’s History English Law, p. 395. [53] Rot. Parl. i, 140, A. D. 1302. [54] Ringrose, “Marriage and Divorce Laws,” p. 9.