who bona fide but erroneously believed that the other spouse of the previous marriage is dead are deemed to be legitimate (§ 1699).

Policy of German Law.-From an examination of the foregoing provisions it will be seen that both as regards personal relations and property the German law differs in material respects from our own. It recognises the validity of what we term "bigamous marriages," provided they are contracted in good faith, at the same time allowing either party to such a marriage, unless estopped by knowledge, to take steps to have it annulled within a limited time if he or she so desires; but taking care to provide that the children born of such a marriage are to be considered legitimate even if the marriage itself is set aside. And as regards property, the Code gives the returning Enoch Arden a year from the time when he learns that he has been judicially pronounced dead within which to reclaim his property. At first sight it seems as if the framers of the Code were concerned more about preserving the property rather than the domestic rights of the absent person, for no power is given to him to challenge a new marriage contracted by the spouse he left behind him. But a little reflection will explain the apparent anomaly. Property can be restored, or its value repaid, without disturbing the domestic relations of the persons called upon to make restitution, but a marriage, with its manifold new relations cannot be undone without inflicting grievous injury on a whole circle of innocent people; and accordingly the power to inflict this injury is denied to the returning spouse, who by his absence and silence has contributed to bring about the altered state of things. In the terminology of our own law, he has estopped himself from complaining of the second marriage.

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS: MALACCA LANDS.

[Contributed by the HON. W. R. COLLYER, Attorney-General, Straits Settlements.]

AN Ordinance has lately been passed in the Straits Settlements with the short title of "The Malacca Customary Land Transfer Ordinance, 1901," which deserves a passing notice, because it is one of the few enactments of that colony dealing with and confirming institutions which had their root in a state of things which existed long before the ascendancy or even the arrival of the English.

Legislation and the "Lex loci" in the Straits Settlements.-Legislation in the Straits Settlements has followed the lines of British legislation as closely, probably, as in any colony. The settlements founded at Penang by Captain Light in 1786, and at Singapore by Sir Stamford Raffles in 1819, succeeded to no local system of government sufficiently organised to attract the attention or to merit the consideration of the newcomers. An heterogeneous foreign population joined the settlers and shared their fortunes. There was no setting up of an alien domination over an organised indigenous population, and the lex loci, such as it was, never exercised enough influence over the inhabitants at large to call for the attention and consideration of the governing body, except so far as a regard for local custom may be indicated in the general direction given by the letters patent constituting the Supreme Court of Judicature, that due attention should be had to the several religions and manners and usages of the "native inhabitants" (which appears, by the way, to be an early instance of the use of the word "native" as equivalent to "non-European ").

Malacca: Its Customary Land Tenure. The settlement of Malacca had an entirely different history. Founded by Albuquerque in 1511, and taken by the Dutch from the Portuguese in 1641, it had "enjoyed " European government for more than three hundred years when finally ceded by the Dutch to Great Britain in 1824. It might have been expected that, as in Ceylon and elsewhere, the Roman-Dutch law would have continued in operation after the cession. But probably Malacca was not considered of sufficient importance for the adoption of a system of law different from that in force in the other settlements, and no doubt the adoption of Roman

Dutch law in one settlement out of three, and that the least important, would have been far from convenient.

There was, however, an important exception to the complete adoption of British law in Malacca. The Malacca customary land tenure was retained, though in the other settlements the law of real property, as modified by local enactments, prevailed from the first.

The Malacca customary tenure is, in fact, the Mohammedan land tenure as received by the Malays, introduced, doubtless, by Arab influence, as part of the Arab civilisation and religion. Under it the land, for the purpose of cultivation, is held from the Crown (or from some other over-lord, the Crown's grantee), subject to the payment of tithe, the right of the lord to minerals, and the right of resumption for public purposes, or in case of non-cultivation for a period of three years. It is a hereditary right to occupy and cultivate the surface of the land under a superior lord who is the actual owner of the soil subject to the rights of the cultivator.

Dutch and British Influences.-Under the Dutch, the customary tenure of Malacca appears to have remained untouched, and was probably well understood.

Several eminent Dutchmen appear to have acquired considerable landed property in the settlement, but they seem to have held their lands as overlords, while the native occupiers remained in possession, paying their tithes and owing their duties to the private proprietor instead of the State. Under British government the principle of respecting local tenures of land has always been observed; and Malacca formed no exception to this rule. But whether from an imperfect understanding of the custom or from other causes, there is no doubt that the tenure of land in Malacca presented considerable difficulties, to obviate which an Ordinance was passed in 1886 "to declare and amend the law relating to customary rights in land in Malacca."

Two points may be observed with regard to this tenure of land: first, it is exceedingly well adapted for small holdings by peasant occupiers (all the State land in the Ottoman Empire is held under it, and as a system it leaves little to be desired); secondly, being par excellence a poor man's tenure, the British system of conveyancing, however admirable, is quite inapplicable to it.

Land Registration.-There has always been a system of registration for the Malacca lands; but such registration has not conferred an indefeasible title, and though the operation of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Ordinance of 1886 was expressly excluded in 1890 from affecting the customary lands in Malacca, yet British conveyancing has played a large part in the operation of every kind of transfer of such lands. The results, as might be expected among a population of very ignorant Malay peasants, have been often far from good-sometimes far from what the parties desired.

The Malacca Customary Lands Transfer Ordinance, 1901.-The object of the present Ordinance is to legalise the existing system of registration and to make title entirely dependent on registration, the primary evidence of title being the registration itself, while each occupier has an extract from the register as his document of title. Transfers will be made at the Land Office in the presence of the parties or their agents, and no transfer will be valid unless made in accordance with the provisions of the Ordinance. Conveyances and mortgage deeds will no longer be necessary or even of any value, and it is hoped that the simplification of the method of transfer will be a real boon to the peasant occupier. The system is one which he understands and every precaution has been taken to prevent fraud.

The position of the customary holder will be very like that of the peasant occupier (not "proprietor "-the "proprietor" is the Sultan) in the Ottoman Empire. For each little patch of ground on which he grows his barley, sesame, or cotton, the Turkish peasant has a separate certificate, or kotchan, equivalent to the Malacca extract from the register. He in general cannot read, and if called upon to prove his title to one of his plots, he hands his whole bundle of kotchans to the Court to choose from. In the Turkish Empire these kotchans are most miserable documents to look at-soft and ragged, and ready to fall to pieces. But the quality of paper is not the consequence of economy, but an intentional precaution against fraud, for no one can commit forgery by altering the writing on such paper. Probably, however, this is a precaution which the Malacca Land Office will not think necessary.

NOTES.

British Commercial Travellers in Germany.-"The municipal law of Germany," writes Mr. Julius Hirschfeld, "does not extend to foreigners an inherent right to carry on business in travelling about that country. The Act (Gewerbe-Ordnung) relating to such trading provides: 'Foreigners may be permitted to exercise their trade in travelling. The Federal Council is authorised to issue such orders as are requisite for the purpose' (Par. 56 [d]). The order regulating the conditions under which they may ply their trade is dated November 27th, 1896, and distinguishes between three categories of foreign travelling traders, viz :—

(1) The subjects of such States with which their position has been agreed upon by a special treaty ;

(2) The subjects of such States with which a general commercial treaty containing the most favoured nation clause subsists;

(3) The subjects of any other nation with which no such convention is in force.

"Travellers of the first class are, in conformity with those treaties, substantially placed on the same footing as the natives, with special facilities as to general trading licences; those of the second class do not enjoy quite the same advantages, but are entitled to take out a licence as foreign commercial travellers available for the whole Empire (subject to local taxation); traders of the third class, however, are in an altogether different position in so far as in their licences they are not characterised as commercial travellers but as itinerant dealers, and are thus placed on the same footing as hawkers and pedlars. Their licence is, as a rule, only available for the administrative district for which it is issued, or extended to by the competent authorities, and must be renewed at least once a year. Licensees have to pay taxes in every particular State, and trading without a licence is punishable with a fine or imprisonment.

"Since the Commercial Treaty between Great Britain and the Zollverein came, at the instance of the British Government, to an end in July, 1898, the British commercial travellers would have been relegated to the lastnamed category. The Federal Council, however, decided in June, 1898, that the subjects and products of the United Kingdom and its colonies (except Canada) and possessions should, until further notice, be granted the same advantages as those of the most favoured nation."