youthful offenders and the establishment of certified reformatory schools, see REFORMATORY.

LUNATICS.

Under the Lunacy Act, 1890, 53 & 54 Vict. c. 5, s. 276, the committee of a county lunatic asylum may appoint and remunerate a minister of any religion to attend the patients of the religious persuasion to which the minister belongs.

SCHOOLS.

The rights of Roman Catholics with regard to religious education in schools supported out of public funds are precisely the same as those of other persuasions, and call for no special comment (see arts. EDUCATION; INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL; REFORMATORY). For a model trustdeed for a Roman Catholic elementary school, see Lilly and Wallis, op. cit. p. 230.

RELIGIOUS EDUCATION OF INFANTS.

Questions affecting the religious education of infants are frequently of special interest as between Roman Catholics and Protestants, but the law being absolutely impartial and having no regard to religious interests as such, is not appropriate for discussion here (see art. INFANTS).

A word may be said as to the legal bearing of the antenuptial agreements to educate children in the Roman Catholic faith which are of common occurrence in the case of marriages between Roman Catholics and Protestants. Such agreements are not binding as legal contracts, but an antenuptial agreement in favour of the mother's religion may have weight in considering whether there has been waiver or abandonment of the father's right to have his child educated in his own religion (Andrews v. Salt, 1873, L. R. 8 Ch. 622; and see Lilly and Wallis, op. cit. chap. iv.).

TRUSTS AND BEQUESTS.

Prior to the Roman Catholic Relief Act, 1791, all trusts and bequests for Roman Catholic religious uses were void in consequence of the illegality of the Roman Catholic religion; and by sec. 17 of that Act it was expressly provided that whatever uses and trusts were theretofore deemed superstitious or unlawful, should continue to be so deemed. The Roman Catholic Emancipation Act, 1829, was silent on the subject; so, to remove doubts, in 1832 the Roman Catholic Charities Act, 2 & 3 Will. iv. c. 115, was passed, whereby it was enacted that His Majesty's subjects professing the Roman Catholic religion, in respect of their schools, places of religious worship, education, and charitable purposes in Great Britain, and the property held therewith, and the persons employed in or about the same, should in respect thereof be subject to the same laws as the Protestant dissenters are subject to in England in respect to their schools and places for religious worship, education, and charitable purposes, and not further or otherwise. Trusts and bequests for the religious purposes of Protestant dissenters have been lawful since the Toleration Act, 1688. The effect of 2 & 3 Will. IV. c. 15 is to legalise the same kind of trusts for the religious purposes of Roman Catholics, but not to validate certain other kinds of trusts,

to be presently noticed, which are connected with the tenets and practices of Roman Catholicism, and which are void on some special ground of law. Roman Catholic charities were temporarily exempted from the Charitable Trusts Act, 1853, 16 & 17 Vict. c. 137, s. 62, and the exemption was continued by the Charitable Trusts Amendment Act, 1855, 18 & 19 Vict. c. 124, s. 47, and by 19 & 20 Vict. c. 76, 20 & 21 Vict. c. 76, and 21 & 22 Vict. c. 51, to September 1, 1859, after which date Roman Catholic charities became subject to the Charitable Trusts Acts. The Roman Catholic Charities Act, 1860, 23 & 24 Vict. c. 134, s. 1, provides that Roman Catholic charities for lawful purposes are not to be invalidated by the addition of an unlawful trust, but that the property may be apportioned and the whole applied cy-près to lawful Roman Catholic purposes by order of the Court or the Board of Charity Commissioners for England and Wales. But the section does not of course apply where the fund is wholly dedicated to unlawful purposes and no legal charitable intent is disclosed (In re Blundell's Trusts, 30 Beav. 360).

Roman Catholic trusts and bequests may be invalidated as being— (a) superstitious; (b) otherwise prohibited by law; (c) lawful but not charitable in the legal meaning of the term, and therefore within the law against perpetuities.

(a) The doctrine of SUPERSTITIOUS USES is dealt with in separate articles (see CHARITIES; PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD; SUPERSTITIOUS USES). It may suffice here to refer to the leading case of West v. Shuttleworth, 1835, 2 Myl. & K. 684, which decided that in view of the Statute of Chantries, 1 Edw. VI. c. 14, dispositions of property to secure prayers and masses for the dead are void, notwithstanding the general validation of Roman Catholic trusts and bequests by 2 & 3 Will. IV. c. 115. But such a disposition as a bequest to a priest for the support of public worship would not be invalidated by the addition of a request expressly stated not to constitute a trust or legal obligation, that mass may be offered for the testator or any other deceased person. The principle is that of Rowbotham v. Dunnett, 1878, 8 Ch. D. 430.

(b) Trusts and bequests for the collective benefit of religious orders of men in the Church of Rome bound by monastic or religious vows, are void by reason of the illegality of such orders under the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act, above noticed. But it must be remembered that the disability does not apply to communities of secular priests not bound by vows, such as Oratorians, Oblates of St. Charles, etc. On the other hand, a direct bequest to an individual member or individual members of a forbidden order is good as a private gift; for the ancient doctrine that a person who has taken religious vows is civiliter mortuus no longer applies, and there is nothing to prevent the individual monk holding property and disposing of it in any way he pleases. It seems, too, that a bequest to an order upon trust to apply the fund for good charitable purposes would not fail on account of the trustee's disability. In the Irish case of Carbery v. Cox, 1852, 3 Ir. Ch. 231, a bequest of £20 a year to the monks of S to provide clothes for the poor children attending their school was held a good charitable trust, during the lives of the monks at S at the time of the testator's death, and the survivors, the fund afterwards to be applied cy-près, under a scheme to be settled subsequently; but a bequest of £20 a year after the death of M. C. to the monks of Mount Melleray for their chapel, was held bad on the ground that the abbot died before M. C., and that the

Court could not recognise his successor or discover any general charitable purpose.

In Hogan v. Byrne, 1862, 13 Ir. R. C. L. 166, a devise and bequest to the Christian Brothers "to pay their rent was held to be a bequest to the order and not to the individual monks, and therefore bad.

In Kehoe v. Wilson, 1880, L. R. Ir. 7 Ch. 10, bequests to the superiors for the time being of three religious orders in Dublin, to be applied in building or repairing and maintaining churches, was held to be bad, on the ground that the intended beneficiaries were not the public coming to worship in the churches, but the monks, who would otherwise have had to provide the money for the works out of their own funds. This reasoning, as pointed out by Lilly and Wallis, op. cit. p. 146, seems open to objection; especially in the case, common in the Roman Catholic communion in this country, of a religious order intrusted by the recognised Roman Catholic ecclesiastical authority with the care of a "mission," i.e. with the duty of providing religious ministrations and public worship for the benefit of Roman Catholics residing within a certain area.

In these circumstances a testator wishing to benefit a forbidden order may either adopt the simple expedient of an immediate gift to an individual member; or he may resort to the more elaborate device recommended in Elphinstone's Introduction to Conveyancing, 6th ed., p. 478, of leaving with his will a letter addressed to the legatees or devisees, stating what he wishes to have done with the gift, in which case it is essential that the testator should carefully abstain from communicating his intentions to the legatees or devisees during his lifetime.

(c) A gift for a purpose which is neither superstitious nor prohibited by law, such as a community of secular priests not bound by vows, or a community of nuns, will be good as a charity if the objects of the community are charitable. If, as in the case of a contemplative order of nuns, the objects are not charitable, the community is in the same legal position as a club, and an immediate gift to it is a good private gift to the members (Cocks v. Manners, 1871, L. R. 12 Eq. 574); but any trust for such an institution must be limited in time so as not to violate the law against perpetuities, for, not being a charity, a perpetual trust would be void for remoteness (Carre v. Long, 1860, 2 De G., F. & J. 75; 45 E. R. 550; cp. the principle laid down by North, J., in In re Dean, Cooper Dean v. Stevens, 1889, 41 Ch. D. 552). See also the cases enumerated in article CHARITIES, Vol. II. pp. 680 et seq.

A Roman Catholic bishop, being unknown to the law of the land, is not a corporation sole with perpetual succession. Hence in framing trusts and bequests where such a one is concerned, care has to be taken to describe him sufficiently for purposes of identification as an individual, and to join, in the event of a vacancy in the episcopal office, as alternative donees, the person or persons administering it for the time being.

[Authorities. For contemporary law, A Manual of the Law especially affecting Catholics, by W. S. Lilly and J. P. Wallis; for historical learning, Gibson's Codex; Cawley's Law of Recusants, 1680; and Anstey's Guide to the Law affecting Roman Catholics, 1842.]

Roman Dutch Law.-In Ceylon, Guiana, and the South African colonies, the basis of the local law is Roman Dutch. Like their

neighbours in England, the Dutch people were firmly attached to their own customs; the Roman law is said to have been introduced by William II., but in Holland, as in other continental countries, the Corpus Juris was always regarded as a storehouse of rules and principles. The Reformation, and the emancipation of the Netherlands, gave a great impulse to legal study. Grotius (1583-1645) may be said to have laid the foundation of modern international law in his famous treatise De Jure Belli ac Pacis; he also wrote an Introduction to the Laws of Holland, which is still used as a text-book. Simon Van Leeuwen (1625-1682) is best known as the author of Commentaries on Roman Dutch Law; his Censura Forensis is also "a work of very high authority" (Denyssen v. Mostert, 1872, L. R. 4 P. C. 255). Among the authors cited with respect in our own Privy Council Reports may be mentioned Huber, Noodt, Vinnius, Peckius, and especially J. Voet (1647-1714), whose Commentary on the Pandects is constantly quoted and followed, especially in South Africa. As explained in the articles CAPE COLONY; CEYLON; ORANGE RIVER COLONY; TRANSVAAL, etc., the Roman Dutch Law in British colonies has been considerably affected by English influences.

[Authorities.-Works cited in foregoing article, and Burge, Foreign and Colonial Laws. A somewhat inadequate translation of Van Leeuwen's Commentaries was published in 1820; a new and better translation (London, 1881) by Mr. J. Kotzé, some time Chief Justice of the Transvaal.]

Romilly's Act (52 Geo. III. c. 101). "An Act to provide a summary remedy in cases of abuses of trusts created for charitable purposes." It enables in every case of a breach of any trust or supposed breach of any trust created for charitable purposes, or whenever the direction of the Court shall be deemed necessary for the administration of any trust for charitable purposes, any two or more persons to present a petition to the Court stating such complaint, and praying such relief as the nature of the case may require, and upon the hearing of such petition the Court is empowered to make such order as may be just. It has been decided that the jurisdiction under this Act is very wide (Re Shrewsbury School, 1849, 1 Macn. & G. 325), and that by reason of the power to administer the trust thereby given, the Court can order a sale, which on many occasions it has done (Re Parke's Charity, 1841, 12 Sim. 329; 59 E. R. 1158; 56 R. R. 65; Re Overseers of Ecclesall, 1852, 16 Beav. 297; 51 E. R. 793; Re Ashton's Charity, 1856, 22 Beav. 288; 52 E. R. 1119).

Romney Marsh.-A large tract of marsh land on the south coast of Kent, the draining and embanking of which has for many centuries been governed by special laws. The Marsh was incorporated at a very early date under the title of "the bailiff, jurats, and commonalty of Romney Marsh, in the county of Kent "-the conservancy of the drains and sea-walls being vested in a body of twenty-three lords of manors, called the "Lords of the Marsh," or the "Lords of the Levels." The special laws of the Marsh have been saved in several modern Acts relating to drainage.

Roncaria.-"Roncaria or Runcaria signifieth land full of brambles and briars, and is derived of roncier, the French word, which signifieth the same, and as much as senticetum" (Co. Litt. 5 a).

Rood (Rood Loft).-The word has been defined as "a presentment of the carved, sculptured, moulded, or painted figure of our Lord on the cross, a crucifix with images at the base," which, before the Reformation, was ordinarily to be found in parish churches in England (Lord Penzance, Clifton v. Ridsdale, 1876, 1 P. D. 316, 354); or as a "crucifix which, when complete, is accompanied by the figures of St. John and the Virgin Mary, placed one on each side of the foot of the cross, though these are often omitted" (Parker, Glossary of Architecture, i. 392). The rood was generally supported either by a beam, called a rood-beam, or by a gallery, called the rood-loft, over the screen separating the choir or chancel of a church from the nave. The roodloft does not appear to have been common in England before, if so soon as, the fourteenth century, or general before the fifteenth, and was approached from the inside of the church generally by a small staircase in the wall, which is often to be found in churches which have lost all other traces of them; and it was occasionally placed above the chancel arch. Lights were generally kept burning in rood-lofts, and from them the rood itself was kept crowned, adorned, or veiled, as the season might require. The rood-screen was the name given to the lattice work and cross-barred partition which in some churches is interposed between the chancel and the nave, or to the screen of elaborately-carved solid wood or stone, such as in some of our cathedrals separates the choir from the rest of the church. The rood-beam was sometimes termed the candlebeam (from the lights kept burning there); and the terms rood-tower or rood-steeple were sometimes applied to the tower built over the intersection of a cruciform church, and rood-arch to the arch between the nave and chancel, from its being immediately over the rood-loft (Oliphant, Church Ornaments (1852); Parker, Glossary of Architecture (1860), i. 392; Vicar of St. John the Baptist, Timberhill, v. Rectors, [1895] P. 71, 78).

Roods were left untouched under Henry VIII.; and in Cromwell's Injunctions of 1538, the clergy are ordered to remove such images as had been superstitiously applied or treated with over-proportioned regard, and to this purpose not to offer any candles or tapers to be set before any image, but only the light in the rood-loft, the light before the sacrament of the altar, and the light about the sepulchre, these being allowed to stand for the ornamenting of the church and the solemnity of divine service (Perry, Church Ornaments (1857), 17). Under Edward VI., however, together with other images, they were generally taken down, and after being restored under Mary, were again taken down under Elizabeth. In 1561 there is an order by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners with regard to all rood-lofts not already transposed, that "the upper part thereof with the solles be quite taken down into the upper parts of the vautes, and beam running in length over the said vautes, by putting some convenient crest upon the said beam towards the church" (Heylyn's Reformation, quoted in Vicar of St. John the Baptist, Timberhill, v. Rectors, supra, p. 80); and a similar order appears in Archbishop Grindall's articles in 1576 (Oliphant, above).

The legality of roods or rood-lofts at the present day in a church of the Church of England is governed by the general law of that Church relating to IMAGES (q.v.), and depends on "whether they do or do not, or will or will not, encourage or lead to idolatrous or superstitious worship in the place where they are or are to be put" (Lindley, L.J., R. v. Bishop of London, 1889, 24 Q. B. D. 213, 237); or "whether they