of every kind laid on commerce, render the productions and merchandise of India and China at least as dear as in Europe!" Happily, however, this miserable policy, the effects of which have been admirably depicted by M. de la Perouse, has been materially modified during the last few years. The events of the late war destroyed for ever the old colonial system of Spain; and the ships of all nations are now freely admitted into Manilla and the other ports in the Philippines. An unprecedented stimulus has, in consequence, been given to all sorts of industry; and its progress will no doubt become more rapid, according as a wider experience and acquaintance with foreigners makes the natives better aware of the advantages of commerce and industry, and disabuses them of the prejudices of which they have been so long the slaves.

The Monies, Weights, and Measures, used at Manilla, are nearly the same as in Spain.— (See CADIZ.) They have, however, this difference,-that they estimate weight by piastres: 16 piastres are supposed to - 1 lb. Spanish weight, though they are not quite so much; 11 ounces or piastres 1 tale of silk; 22 ounces = 1 catty; 8 ounces 1 marc of silver; and 10 ounces = 1 tale of gold. 16 piastres or ounces = 15 ounces avoirdupois; 100 1 picul 133 lbs. avoirdupois.

catties

(Account of the Quantity and Value of the Produce exported from Manilla in 1837.

MARBLE (Ger. Rus. and Lat. Marmor; Du. Marmer; Fr. Marbre; It. Marmo; Sp. Marmol), a genus of fossils, composed chiefly of lime; being a bright and beautiful stone, moderately hard, not giving fire with steel, fermenting with and soluble in acid menstrua, and calcining in a slight fire.

The colours by which marbles are distinguished are almost innumerable. Some are quite black; others, again, are of a snowy white; some are greenish, others greyish, reddish, bluish, yellowish, &c.; while some are variegated and spotted with many different colours and shades of colour. The finest solid modern marbles are those of Italy, Blankenburg, France, and Flanders. Great quantities of very beautiful marble have been lately discovered at Portsoy in Banffshire, and at Tiree and other places in the Western Isles. Kilkenny, in Ireland, has abundance of beautiful black marble intermixed with white spots, called Kilkenny marble. Derbyshire abounds in this mineral. Near Kemlyn-bay, in Anglesea there is a quarry of beautiful marble, called verde di Corsica, from its also being found in Corsica. Its colours are green, black, white, and dull purple, irregularly disposed. Italy produces the most valuable marble, and its exportation makes a considerable branch of her foreign commerce. The black and the milk-white marble of Carara, in the duchy of Massa, are particularly esteemed.

The marbles of Germany, Norway, and Sweden are very inferior, being mixed with a sort of scaly limestone.

Marble is of so hard, compact, and fine a texture, as readily to take a beautiful polish. That most esteemed by statuaries is brought from the island of Paros, in the Archipelago: it was employed by Praxiteles and Phidias, both of whom were natives of that island; whence also the famous Arundelian marbles were brought. The marble of Carara is likewise in high repute among sculptors.

The specific gravity of marble is from 2:700 to 2:800. Black marble owes its colour to a slight mixture of iron.

MARITIME LAW. By maritime law is meant the law relating to harbours, ships, and seamen. It forms an important branch of the commercial law of all maritime nations. It is divided into a variety of different departments; such as those with respect to harbours, to the property of ships, the duties and rights of masters and seamen, contracts of affreightment, average, salvage, &c. The reader will find those subjects treated of under their respective

heads.

Sketch of the Progress of Maritime Law.-The earliest system of maritime law was compiled by the Rhodians, several centuries before the Christian era. The most celebrated

authors of antiquity have spoken in high terms of the wisdom of the Rhodian laws: luckily, however, we are not wholly left, in forming our opinion upon them, to the vague though commendatory statements of Cicero and Strabo.-(Cicero pro Lege Manilia; Strab. lib. xiv.) The laws of Rhodes were adopted by Augustus into the legislation of Rome; and such was the estimation in which they were held, that the Emperor Antoninus, being solicited to decide a contested point with respect to shipping. is reported to have answered, that it ought to be decided by the Rhodian laws, which were of paramount authority in such cases, unless they happened to be directly at variance with some regulation of the Roman law. ("Ego quidem mundi dominus, lex autem maris legis id Rhodia, qua de rebus nauticis præscripta est, judicetur, quatenus nulla nostrarum legum adversatur. Hoc idem Divus quoque Augustus judicavit.”) The rule of the Rhodian law with respect to average contributions in the event of a sacrifice being made at sea for the safety of the ship and cargo, is expressly laid down in the Digest (lib. xiv. tit. 2.); and the most probable conclu sion seems to be, that most of the regulations as to maritime affairs embodied in the compilations of Justinian have been derived from the same source. The regulations as to average adopted by all modern nations, are borrowed, with hardly any alteration, from the Roman, or rather, as we have seen, from the Rhodian law!-a conclusive proof of the sagacity of those by whom they had been originally framed. The only authentic fragments of the Rhodian laws are those in the Digest. The collection entitled Jus Navale Rhodiorum, published at Bâle in 1561, is now admitted by all critics to be spurious.

The first modern code of maritime law is said to have been compiled at Amalphi, in Italy, -a city at present in ruins; but which, besides being early distinguished for its commerce, will be for ever famous for the discovery of the Pandects, and the supposed invention of the mariner's compass. The Amalphitan code is said to have been denominated Tabula Amalphitana. But if such a body of law really existed, it is singular that it should never have been published, nor even any extracts from it. M. Pardessus has shown that all the authors who have referred to the Amalphitan code and asserted its existence, have copied the statement of Freccia, in his book De Subfeudis.-(Collection des Loix Maritimes, tome i. p. 145.) And as Freccia assures us that the Almalphitan code continued to be followed in Naples at the time when he wrote (1570), it is difficult to suppose that it could have entirely disappeared; and it seems most probable, as nothing peculiar to it has ever transpired, that it consisted principally of the regulations laid down in the Roman law, which, it is known, preserved their ascendancy for a longer period in the south of Italy than any where else.

But, besides Amalphi, Venice, Marseilles, Pisa, Genoa, Barcelona, Valencia, and other towns of the Mediterranean, were early distinguished for the extent to which they carried commerce and navigation. In the absence of any positive information on the subject, it seems reasonable to suppose that their maritime laws would be principally borrowed from those of Rome, but with such alterations and modifications as might be deemed requisite to accommodate them to the particular views of each state. But whether in this or in some other way, it is certain that various conflicting regulations were established, which led to much confusion and uncertainty; and the experience of the inconveniences thence arising, doubtless contributed to the universal adoption of the Consolato del Mare as a code of maritime law. Nothing certain is known as to the origin of this code. Azuni (Droit Maritime de l'Europe, tome i. pp. 414-439., or rather Jorio, Codice Ferdinando, from whose work a large proportion of Azuni's is literally translated) contends, in a very able dissertation, that the Pisans are entitled to the glory of having compiled the whole, or at least the greater part, of the Consolato del Mare. On the other hand, Don Antonio de Capmany, in his learned and excellent work on the commerce of Barcelona-(Antiguo Comercio de Barcelona, tomo i. pp. 170-183.), has endeavoured to show that the Consolato was compiled at Barcelona; and that it contains the rules according to which the consuls, which the Barcelonese had established in foreign places so early as 1268, were to render their decisions. It is certain that the Consolato was printed for the first time at Barcelona, in 1502; and that the early Italian and French editions are translations from the Catalan. Azuni has, indeed, sufficiently proved, that the Pisans had a code of maritime laws at a very early period, and that several of the regulations in it are substantially the same as those in the Consoluto. But it does not appear that the Barcelonese were aware of the regulations of the Pisans, or that the resemblance between them and those in the Consolato is more than accidental; or may not fairly be ascribed to the concurrence that can hardly fail to obtain among well-informed persons legislating upon the same topics, and influenced by principles and practices derived from the civil law.

M. Pardessus, in the second volume of his excellent work already referred to, appears to have been sufficiently disposed, had there been any grounds to go upon, to set up a claim in favour of Marseilles to the honour of being the birthplace of the Consolato; but he candidly admits that such a pretension could not be supported, and unwillingly adheres to Capmany's opinion.—“ Quoique François,” says he, “quoique portée par des sentimens de reconnoissance, qu'aucun évènement ne sauroit affoiblir, à faire valoir tout ce qui est en faveur de.

Marseilles, je dois reconnoître franchement que les probabilités l'emportent en faveur de Barcelone."-(Tome ii. p. 24.)

But to whichever city the honour of compiling the Consolato may be due, there can be no doubt that its antiquity has been greatly exaggerated. It is affirmed, in a preface to the different editions, that it was solemnly accepted, subscribed and promulgated, as a body of maritime law, by the Holy See in 1075, and by the Kings of France and other potentates at different periods between 1075 and 1270. But Capmany, Azuni, and Pardessus, have shown in the clearest and most satisfactory manner that the circumstances alluded to in this preface could not possibly have taken place, and that it is wholly unworthy of the least attention. The most probable opinion seems to be, that it was compiled, and began to be introduced, about the end of the 13th or the beginning of the 14th century. And notwithstanding its prolixity, and the want of precision and clearness, the correspondence of the greater number of its rules with the ascertained principles of justice and public utility, gradually led, without the intervention of any agreement, to its adoption as a system of maritime jurisprudence by all the nations contiguous to the Mediterranean. It is still of high authority. Casaregis says of it, though, perhaps, too strongly "Consulatus maris, in materiis maritimis, tanquam universalis consuetudo habens vim legis inviolabiliter attenda est apud omnes provincias et nationes."-(Disc. 213. n. 12.)

The collection of sea laws next in celebrity, but anterior, perhaps, in point of time, is that denominated the Roole des Jugements d'Oleron. There is as much diversity of opinion as to the origin of these laws, as there is with respect to the origin of the Consolato. The prevailing opinion in Great Britain has been, that they were compiled by direction of Queen Eleanor, the wife of Henry II., in her quality of Duchess of Guienne; and that they were afterwards enlarged and improved by her son Richard I., at his return from the Holy Land: but this statement is now admitted to rest on no good foundation. The most probable theory seems to be, that they are a collection of the rules or practices followed at the principal French ports on the Atlantic, as Bordeaux, Rochelle, St. Malo, &c. They contain, indeed, rules that are essential to all maritime transactions, wherever they may be carried on; but the references in the code sufficiently prove that it is of French origin. The circumstance of our monarch's having large possessions in France at the period when the Rules of Oleron were collected, naturally facilitated their introduction into England; and they have long enjoyed a very high degree of authority in this country. "I call them the Laws of Oleron," said a great civilian-(Sir Leoline Jenking, Charge to the Cinque Ports), "not but that they are peculiarly enough English, being long since incorporated into the customs and statutes of our admiralties; but the equity of them is so great, and the use and reason of them so general, that they are known and received all the world over by that rather than by any other name." Molloy, however, has more correctly, perhaps, said of the laws of Oleron, that "they never obtained any other or greater force than those of Rhodes formerly did; that is, they were esteemed for the reason and equity found in them, and applied to the case emergent."-(De Jure Maritimo et Navali, Introd.)

A code of maritime law issued at Wisby, in the island of Gothland, in the Baltic, has long enjoyed a high reputation in the North. The date of its compilation is uncertain; but it is comparatively modern. It is true that some of the northern jurists contend that the Laws of Wisby are older than the Rules of Oleron, and that the latter are chiefly copied from the former! But it has been repeatedly shown that there is not so much as the shadow of a foundation for this statement.-(See Pardessus, Collection, &c. tome i. pp. 425-462. Foreign Quarterly Review, No. 13. art Hanseatic League.) The Laws of Wisby are not certainly older than the latter part of the 14th or beginning of the 15th century; and have obviously been compiled from the Consolato del Mare, the Rules of Oleron, and other codes that were then in use. Grotius has spoken of these laws in the most laudatory manner:"Quæ de maritimus negotiis," says he, "insula Gothlandiæ habitatoribus placuerunt, tantum in se habent, tum equitatis, tum prudentiæ, ut omnes oceani accolæ eo, non tanquam proprio, sed velut gentium jure, utantur.”—(Prolegomena ad Procopium, p. 64.) Besides the codes now mentioned, the ordinances of the Hanse towns, issued in 1597 and 1614, contain a system of laws relating to navigation that is of great authority. The judgments of Damme, the customs of Amsterdam, &c. are also often quoted.*

But by far the most complete and well digested system of maritime jurisprudence that has ever appeared, is that comprised in the famous Ordonnance de la Marine issued by Louis XIV. in 1681. This excellent code was compiled under the direction of M. Colbert, by individuals of great talent and learning, after a careful revision of all the ancient sea laws of France and other countries, and upon consultation with the different parliaments, the courts of admiralty, and the chambers of commerce, of the different towns. It combines whatever experience and the wisdom of ages had shown to be best in the Roman laws, and in the institutions of the modern maritime states of Europe. In the preface to his treatise on the

A translation of the Law of Oleron, Wisby, and the Hanse towns, is given in the 3d edition of Malyne's Lex Mercatoria; but the edition of them in the work of M. Pardessus, referred to in the text, is infinitely superior to every other.

MARITIME LAW.

Law of Shipping, Lord Tenterden says,-"If the reader should be offended at the frequent references to this ordinance, I must request him to recollect that those references are made to the maritime code of a great commercial nation, which has attributed much of its national prosperity to that code: a code composed in the reign of a politic prince; under the auspices of a wise and enlightened minister; by laborious and learned persons, who selected the most valuable principles of all the maritime laws then existing; and which, in matter, method, and style, is one of the most finished acts of legislation that ever was promulgated." The ordinance of 1681 was published in 1760, with a detailed and most elaborate commentary by M. Valin, in 2 volumes, 4to. It is impossible which to admire most in this commentary, the learning or the sound good sense of the writer. Lord Mansfield was indebted for no inconsiderable portion of his superior knowledge of the principles of maritime jurisprudence to a careful study of M. Valin's work.

That part of the Code de Commerce which treats of maritime affairs, insurance, &c. is copied, with very little alteration, from the ordinance of 1681. The few changes that have been made are not always improvements.

No system or code of maritime law has ever been issued by authority in Great Britain. The laws and practices that now obtain amongst us in reference to maritime affairs have been founded principally on the practices of merchants, the principles laid down in the civil law, the Laws of Oleron and Wisby, the works of distinguished jurisconsults, the judicial decisions of our own and foreign countries, &c. A law so constructed has necessarily been in a progressive state of improvement; and, though still susceptible of material amendment, it corresponds, at this moment, more nearly, perhaps, than any other system of maritime law, with those universally recognised principles of justice and general convenience, by which the transactions of merchants and navigators ought to be regulated.

The decisions of Lord Mansfield did much to fix the principles, and to improve and perfect the maritime law of England. It is also under great obligations to Lord Stowell. The decisions of the latter chiefly, indeed, respect questions of neutrality, growing out of the con flicting pretensions of belligerents and neutrals during the late war; but the principles and doctrines which he unfolds in treating those questions, throw a strong and steady light on most branches of maritime law. It has occasionally, indeed, been alleged, and the allegation is probably, in some degree, well founded,-that his Lordship has conceded too much to the claims of belligerents. Still, however, his judgments must be regarded, allowing for this excusable bias, as among the noblest monuments of judicial wisdom of which any "They will be contemplated," says Mr. Serjeant Marshall, "with apcountry can boast. plause and veneration, as long as depth of learning, soundness of argument, enlightened wisdom, and the chaste beauties of eloquence, hold any place in the estimation of mankind.” -(On Insurance, Prelim. Disc.)

The "Treatise of the Law relative to Merchant Ships and Seamen," by the late Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench, does credit to the talents, erudition, and liberality of its noble and learned author. It gives, within a brief compass, a clear and admirable exposition of the most important branches of our maritime law; and may be consulted with equal facility and advantage by the merchant or general scholar, as by the lawyer. Mr. Serjeant Marshall has entered very fully into some, and has touched upon most points of maritime law, in his work on Insurance; and has discussed them with great learning and sagacity. The works of Mr. Justice Park, Mr. Holt, and a few others, are also valuable. Of the earlier treatises, the Lex Mercatoria of Malynes is by far the best; and, considering the period of its publication (1622), is a very extraordinary performance.

Statutes with respect to Importation and Exportation, Navigation, &c.—The preceding remarks refer merely to the principles, or leading doctrines, of our maritime law. These, however, have often been very much modified by statutory enactments; and the excessive multiplication of acts of Parliament suspending, repealing, or altering parts of other acts, has often involved our commercial and maritime law in almost inextricable confusion, and been most injurious to the public interests. No one, indeed, who is not pretty conversant with the subject, would readily imagine to what an extent this abuse has sometimes been carried. From the Revolution down to 1786, some hundreds of acts were passed, each enacting some addition, diminution, or change, in the duties, drawbacks, bounties, and regulations previously existing in the customs. In consequence the customs laws became so intricate and unintelligible, that hardly one merchant in fifty could tell the exact amount of duty affecting any article, or the course to be followed either in entering or clearing out vessels; being obliged to leave it entirely to the clerks of the Custom-house to calculate the amount of duties, and to direct him how to proceed so as to avoid forfeiting the goods and the ship! and yet, so powerful is the influence of habit in procuring toleration for the most pernicious absurdities, that this monstrous abuse was allowed to go on increasing for 50 years after it had been denounced as intolerable. Mr. Pitt has the merit of having introduced something like order into this chaos. Under his auspices, all the separate customs duties existing in 1787 were repealed, and new ones substituted in their stead; consisting, in most instances, of the equi valents, so far at least as they could be ascertained, of the old duties. In carrying this mea

23

sure into effect, the House of Commons passed no fewer than 3,000 resolutions. The regu lations as to entries and clearances were also simplified.

The advantages resulting from this measure were very great; but during the war, so many new duties and regulations were passed, that the necessity for a fresh consolidation became again very urgent, and was effected in 1819. It was not, however, in the customs department only, or in the mere article of duties, that the merchant and ship owners were bewildered by the multiplicity of statutory regulations. There was not a single branch of the law regulating their transaction that escaped the rage for legislation. Previously to 1822, no fewer than 113 statutes had been passed relating to the fisheries, and the makers and buyers of sails and cordage were supposed to be familiar with the various obscure and contradictory regulations embodied in the twenty-three acts of parliament relating to these articles! But the enormity of the abuse will be rendered more apparent, by laying before the reader the following extract from the Report of the Lords' Committee on Foreign Trades in 1820.

Before," say their Lordships, "your committee proceed to advert to the points which have been the principal objects of their inquiry, they are anxious to call the attention of the House to the excessive accumulation and complexity of the laws under which the commerce of the country is regulated, with which they were forcibly impressed in the very earliest stage of their proceedings. These laws, passed at different periods, and many of them arising out of temporary circumstances, amount, as stated in a recent computation of them, to upwards of two thousand, of which no less than 1,100 were in force in 1815; and many additions have been since made. After such a statement, it will not appear extraordinary that it should be matter of complaint by the British merchant, that, so far from the course in which he is to guide his transactions being plain and simple-so far from being able to undertake his operations, and to avail himself of favourable openings, as they arise, with promptitude and confidence-he is frequently reduced to the necessity of resorting to the services of professional advisers, to ascertain what he may venture to do, and what he must avoid, before he is able to embark in his commercial adventures with the assurance of being secure from the consequences of an infringement of the law. If this be the case (as is stated to your committee) with the most experienced among the merchants, even in England, in how much greater a degree must the same perplexity and apprehension of danger operate in foreign countries and on foreign merchants, whose acquaintance with our statute book must be supposed to be comparatively limited, and who are destitute of the professional authority which the merchant at home may at all times consult for his direction? When it is recollected, besides, that a trivial unintentional deviation from the strict letter of the acts of parliament may expose a ship and cargo to the inconvenience of seizure, which (whether sustained or abandoned) is attended always with delay and expense, and frequently followed by litigation, it cannot be doubted that such a state of the law must have the most prejudicial influence both upon commercial enterprise in the country, and upon our mercantile relations and intercourse with foreign nations; and perhaps no service more valuable could be rendered to the trade of the empire, nor any measure more effectually contribute to promote the objects contemplated by the House, in the appointment of this committee, than an accurate revision of this vast and confused mass of legislation; and the establishment of some certain, simple, and consistent principles, to which all the regulations of commerce might be referred, and under which the transactions of merchants engaged in the trade of the United Kingdom might be conducted with facility, safety, and confidence."—(p. 4.) Since this Report was printed, a very considerable progress has been made in simplifying and clearing up the statute law, on the principles laid down in it. The law as to shipping and navigation has been particularly improved. The principles laid down in the famous navigation acts of 1650 and 1660 were, indeed, sufficiently distinct and obvious; but when these acts were passed, there were above 200 statutes in existence, many of them antiquated and contradictory, which they did not repeal, except in so far as the regulations in them might be inconsistent with those in the new acts. But besides these, a number of statutes were passed almost in every session since 1660, explaining, limiting, extending, or modifying in one way or other, some of the provisions of the navigation acts; so that ultimately there were questions perpetually arising, as to which it was very difficult to discover the precise law. On such occasions, recourse was often had to the courts; and the good sense and equity which generally characterised their decisions mitigated the mischievous consequences resulting from the uncertainty of the statute law, and even gave it the appearance of consistency. Latterly, however, this uncertainty has been well nigh removed. One of the bills introduced by Mr. Wallace for the improvement of the navigation laws repealed above twe hundred statutes! and the new acts substituted in the place of those that were repealed were drawn up with laudable brevity and clearness. But various alterations having been subsequently made in these acts, new statutes embodying the changes were passed last ses sion. The principal are-the 3 & 4 Will. 4. c. 54., for the encouragement of British ship ping and navigation, which may be called the present navigation law-(see NAVIGATION LAWS); the 3 & 4 Will. 4. c. 55., for the registry of British vessels-(see REGISTRY); the 3 & 4 Will. 4. c. 52., containing the regulations with respect to importation and expor