alimony according to circumstances. In settling the amount of this provision, the court will take into consideration::

1st. The amount of fortune brought to the husband by the wife.

2nd. Whether the husband's income arises from realized property, or is dependent upon his personal

exertions.

3rd. The nature of his or her conduct, with regard to the matters which have formed the subject of the suit. 4th. The fact, if proved, of the property having been diminished by the extravagance of either.

The sum allotted in various cases has ranged from one-third to one-half of the husband's income.

Questions of fact that arise out of proceedings to obtain a judicial separation or a divorce may be tried by the judges; but either of the parties, or the court, may require it to be tried before a jury.

The old action of crim. con. is now abolished; but "any husband may, either in a petition for dissolution of marriage, or for judicial separation, or in a petition limited to such object only, claim damages from any person on the ground of his having committed adultery with the wife of such petitioner, and such petition shall be served on the alleged adulterer, and the wife, unless the court shall dispense with such service, or direct some other service to be substituted; and every such petition shall be heard and tried on the same principles, in the same manner, and subject to the same and the like rules and regulations as actions for criminal conversation are now *tried and decided in courts of common law; and after the verdict shall have been given, the court shall have power to direct in what manner such damages shall be paid and applied, and to direct that the whole, or a part thereof, shall be settled for the benefit of the children (if any) of the marriage, or as a provision for the maintenance of the wife."t

*That is, before the passing of the Act.

+20 & 21 Vict. c. 85, sec. 33.

The court has power also to charge the adulterer with the costs of the suit, and to make orders as to the custody of the children.

Either party dissatisfied with the decision of the judgeordinary may appeal to the full court, and from that there is a further appeal to the House of Lords. This appeal must be proceeded with within three months of the pronouncing of the decree of the court below; and when this period has expired without an appeal being prosecuted, or when an appeal has been proceeded with, and is dismissed; or when, as the result of any appeal, any marriage shall be declared to be dissolved, but not sooner, the parties respectively may marry again as though their prior marriage had been dissolved by death. But no clergyman, in holy orders, of the Church of England, shall be compelled to solemnize the marriage of any person whose former marriage may have been dissolved, on the ground of his or her adultery, nor shall he be liable to any penalty, suit, or censure, for solemnizing, or refusing to solemnize, the marriage of any such person provided always, that when any minister of any church or chapel of the United Church of England and Ireland shall refuse to perform such marriage service between any persons, who, but for such refusal, would be entitled to have the same service performed in such church or chapel, such minister shall permit any other minister, in holy orders, of the said United Church, entitled to officiate within the diocese in which such church or chapel is situate, to perform such marriage service in such church or chapel."*

* 20 & 21 Vict. c. 85, secs. 57 and 58.

OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS AND I OU's.

THE common law did not allow a creditor or other person who had only a right to sue another (called a chose in action) to assign that right. It was considered against public policy; as some powerful or wealthy individual might otherwise purchase such rights, and litigation, oppression, and other evils would be created, and increase thereby. But, in process of time, the necessities of the trading community produced a modification. of this rule, and negotiable instruments-i.e., written documents acknowledging a debt, and capable of being transferred from hand to hand-were imported from the law merchant, as it was called, or custom of merchants. Of these instruments the chief are bills of exchange and promissory notes. Bankers' cheques come under the same category. An IO U is, like a bill or note, evidence between the parties to it of the balance of accounts between them, being an abbreviation of the words I Owe You; but it differs from both in not being negotiable.

It is obvious how natural it was, when a man was indebted to another in a sum which he could not at once liquidate, that the creditor should desire to have some document as evidence of the debt in case of death or other eventualities. Hence he would ask for an I O U. But he would also wish to fix the time of payment, and require a written engagement that the time should be duly kept. Thus promissory notes arose, their ordinary form being " On demand;" or, "three months after date; or, "at sight," I promise to pay A B £100

for value received "-expressing both the points referred to. Another object was to get interest on the amount of the debt, which (until the passing of a statute of William IV.) could not be recovered upon a simple contract debt; and the agreement to pay interest was expressed upon the note.

Bills of exchange sprang from a different state of things. Originally a bill of exchange was a letter sent by a creditor in one country to his debtor in another, by the hand of some third person, to whom he therebyamongst other things-directed that his debt should be paid. So, merchant A in London, to whom merchant B in Venice owed £100, sent by the hand of merchant C-who happened to be travelling to the Adriatic-his written greeting, directing and authorizing B to pay the money to C. Thus three very useful ends were answered. In the first place, B did not incur the risks of pirates and shipwreck by sending his money across the sea; C, who might require funds in Italy, did not run the same dangers in taking coin with him on his voyage; and A and B had the use of the same £100 at one and the same time. But C might require his money before he arrived at Venice; and, as from time to time the advantage of making the letter of credit transferable were perceived, the direction (which at first was to pay C personally) was enlarged so as to include any person he might nominate upon the writing itself to receive the amount mentioned in it in his stead, and to whom he might choose to deliver it and thereby transfer his rights therein.

This was effected by adding to the name of C the words, "or his order."

The necessary consequence of this change in its nature was, that the letter ceased to treat of general matters of business between A and B; that it was not sealed up, but delivered open to C; and that eventually it dwindled down into the slip of paper now in use.

The form of a modern inland bill of exchange explains its character and objects. It usually runs as follows:

£100.

London, January 1, 1859.

Three months after date, pay to the order of C, one

hundred pounds sterling, for value received.

To B, Merchant, Liverpool.

(Signed) 4.*

It is as a learned serjeant-at-law, now one of the Justices of the Court of Common Pleas, has described it

an unconditional written order from A to B directing B to pay a sum of money therein named."

A is called the drawer, B the drawee, and C the payee.

Sometimes A, the drawer, is himself the payee. When a bill ordered the payment of its amount to be made otherwise than "on demand," or "at sight," it became desirable for C to obtain a recognition by B of his correspondent A's order, either as a certificate of its genuineness for his own satisfaction, or for facilitating his dealings with it. This recognition was called the acceptance, and now must always be in writing upon the face of the bill.

When B, the drawee, has undertaken to pay the bill, he is called the acceptor. In inland bills of exchangei.e., bills drawn within the United Kingdom-the drawer usually requires the drawee to pay to "self or order;" and having signed the bill, sends it by post or leaves it with the drawee. The latter writes across the paper accepted, payable at " (naming his bankers), signs his name thereto, and returns it to the drawer. The drawer then, by writing his own name at the back of the bill thus accepted-in technical words-endorsing it, renders it for the first time negotiable-that is to say, capable of being transferred from hand to hand, so as to pass as well the property in the bill itself, as also all the rights which the drawer had against the acceptor. The

The form of a foreign bill slightly differs. Foreign bills are usually drawn in sets of three, each of the set being distinguished respectively "This my first (second, or third) of exchange," and the payment of one of the set is a discharge of all.