Footnote 12: Mittermaier. Footnote 13: Montesquieu, _Esprit des Lois_, xii. 2. Footnote 14: _Civil Liberty and Self-Government_, p. 54. Footnote 15: _English Constitution_, p. 382. Footnote 16: _History of his Own Times._ Footnote 17: Sir Charles Trevelyan, in _Good Words_ of January 1, 1871, says—“It is well that the ladies of England have protested against their sex being recognised by Parliament as a _corpus vile_ for the indulgence of irregular lust. If it were possible for them to explain the real extent of the outrage upon womanhood, there would be one universal cry for repeal throughout the land.” Footnote 18: De Lolme on the Constitution, p. 354. Footnote 19: See Coke, p. 50, on Magna Charta. He says, “Nisi per legem terræ,” but by the law of the land. For the true sense and exposition of these words see the Statute of 37 Edward III. cap. 8, where the words ‘but by the law of the land’ are rendered ‘without due process of law;’ for there it is said, though it be contained in the great charter that no man is to be taken, imprisoned, or put out of his freehold without process of law, that is, without indictment or presentment of good and lawful men, where such deeds be done in due manner, or by writ original of common law, etc. In 28 Edward III. ch. 3, the words are rendered “without being brought in to answer but by due process of the common law.” Footnote 20: Coke’s _Institutes_, p. 50. Footnote 21: From this we may expect, following out the Contagious Diseases Acts, that a new office under Government will be created analogous to the Bureau de Mœurs in Paris, and that we shall ere long have a Secretary of State for the regulation of vice. Footnote 22: “Touching the business of martial law, these things are to be observed, viz.—_First_, that in truth and reality it is not a law, but something indulged rather than allowed as a law. The necessity of government, order, and discipline in an army, is that only which can give those laws a continuance: ‘quod enim necessitas cogit defendit.’ _Secondly_, This indulged law was only to extend to members of the army, and never was so much indulged as intended to be executed or exercised upon others. For others who are not listed under the army had no colour or reason to be bound by military constitutions applicable only to the army, whereof they were not parts. But they were to be ordered and governed only according to the laws to which they were subject.”—Hale’s _Common Law of England_, vol. i. p. 54. “The Admiralty Court is not bottomed or founded upon the authority of the civil law, but hath its power and jurisdiction in such matters as are proper for its cognizance. The Court of Admiralty has no jurisdiction of matters or contracts done or made on land; and the true reason for their jurisdiction in matters done at sea is because no jury can come from thence.”—_Ibid._ p. 51.