resources. In the other way, but, I believe, much more rarely, an innocent man may not only suffer in his means, but, what should be of far greater value, in his character and prospects.

The enquiry has become all the more important because of the great increase of illegitimacy in recent years. From the Report of the Registrar General of England for the year 1870, the illegitimate births registered was 44,737, being 5'6 per cent. of all the births registered for that year. In Scotland the ratio apparently is greater. By the Report of the Registrar General for that part of the Kingdom in the ten years 1861-1870 inclusive, of 1,120,791 births, 1,010,730 were legitimate, and 110,061 illegitimate, being 9.7 per cent. of the former class. This, however, for the sake of the credit of Scotland is more apparent than real. Happily since the year 1854 we have had an admirable system of compulsory Registration (17 & 18 Vict. c. 80). We understand that most essential element of statistics is faulty in the South, being there rather a Register of Baptisms than of Births. The Scotch Tables further contain very curious and startling facts as to the great difference of illegitimate to legitimate births uniformly found in certain districts. The general proportion, as has been said, is 9'7. But whilst some districts contribute thereto so small an amount as 4 and 5 per cent., in other districts the proportion mounts up as high as 16'1 and 16.2 per cent. Here is a very interesting field for enquiry to the Social Statist, and the Moral and Religious Reformer, but which is outwith the domain of the Jurist.

There is a most marked distinction between the law and practice of the two countries in this important department. It is my object briefly to state where these differ so that attention may perhaps be directed to their respective merits or blemishes with the hope of amendment in both. These laws in both sections of the kingdom have been changed from time to time. At one time bearing very hard on the mother claiming support, and at other times unduly adverse

to the man from whom support is claimed. A recent alterration in the law of Scotland which, it is believed, was wholly unintentional, has in my experience been most detrimental to the mother claiming support, and otherwise instrumental of admitting gross perjury and otherwise destructive of public morals.

In dealing with the law and practice of England, I am venturing on foreign ground, and should I commit any mistakes our professional friends on the other side of the Tweed will at once correct and forgive me.

1. In England all cases of affiliation are adjudicated on by Justices of the Peace, and that, according to statute law, incorporated with the poor law, and conducted under certain peculiar prescribed forms of procedure. In Scotland these cases are dealt with entirely at common law, in the same way as any other civil debt or claim. Justices have with us at common law in such cases a jurisdiction, but which is now very seldom or never exercised. The claims of aliment are brought in the Court of the Sheriffs. The only statute law which interferes with the claim is the Poor Law Amendment Act, 8 & 9 Vict., c. 83 (1845). This only comes into operation where the child has become chargeable on the parish, and then the parochial board is entitled to prosecute, criminally, the putative father for neglect, who has either acknowledged the paternity or on whom it has been judicially fixed, he being able to contribute his share of support. He may be fined and imprisoned for a certain period. But no order on the suit of the Poor Law authorities is sanctioned by statute for the future support of the child, as is provided under the English law. In England the Poor Law authorities can at any time apply to two justices for an order on the putative father for future aliment, and which is enforced in the same manner as on the suit of the mother. In the year 1873 there were 126 criminal prosecutions in Scotland at the instance of parochial boards, and 61 convictions of putative fathers for neglect to contribute for the support of their children, and who had

thus become chargeable to the parish. In respect of the titles of the Poor Law authorities to obtain an order for future support of the child, the law of England is superior to that of Scotland.

2. The statute law of England, dealing with the support of bastards, goes back so far as the 18th of Elizabeth, (c. 3, s. 2.) The 4th & 5th William IV. c. 97 (1834), was the ruling statute, for a long time, amended by the 7th & 8th Vic., c. IoI; and 8th & 9th Vict., c. 10. The former statutes were superseded by the Bastardy Laws Amendment Act, (1872,) 35th & 36th Vict., c. 65. This last statute containing (no extraordinary fact in legislation) most egregious blunders, called for an amendment of the Amendment Act, (1873,) 36th Vict., c. 9. As has been already noticed, in Scotland there is no statute regulating the claim of affiliation with the single exception of the criminal prosecution for neglect. The claim in Scotland, with its peculiarities, is left to be dealt with at common law in the same manner as any other claim of civil debt. Here the law of England is in advance of that of Scotland, in its having a summary jurisdiction for such claims.

3. In England (35 & 36 Vict., c. 65, s. 3) a single woman, with child, may, on oath, apply to one justice, stating who is the father of the child, for a summons against him. But in this case the day of appearance must be fixed on a day after the birth of a child. In Scotland no claim can be made judicially until after the birth. If, however, the putative father is proved to be about to leave Scotland, he may be proceeded against, as in fuga, on the oath of the mother, supported by some evidence, not of the paternity, but of his intended flight, and he may be put under caution, de judicio sisti, to answer to an action for aliment to be brought after the birth of the child, within a time specified generally six months. Under this head the practice in Scotland seems to be the best. It answers the ends of justice, and does not run the risk of a false issue in the not unfrequent case of no child being born.

4. In England the mother may apply to one justice for a summons against the putative father any time within twelve months from the birth of the child, or at any time thereafter, but only on proof that the man within the first twelve months paid money for its maintenance, or was absent from England during these twelve months and had only returned twelve months before the application. In Scotland there is no restriction of time and no prescription or limitation of the claim and action which may be brought any time within the long negative prescription of forty years. In one case in Scotland a mother was successful in making good her claim after a delay, in one case of thirteen years, and in another of fifteen years. 7th July, 1809, Finlayson, Fac: Col: 426, February, 1842. Thomson 4 D., 833, 6th Dec., 1852. Lamb, 5 D. 248. The limit of time in the case of the mother does not apply in England where the order is sought by the parish authorities. Mora may form a strong presumption against the validity of the claim. There is certainly an advantage in compelling an early resort to law. The loss of evidence, however, is likely to tell more against the claimant than the respondent. Here the law of England may have an advantage over that of Scotland by compelling an early application for redress, and it might be well to have some such limit in Scotland, but certainly of greater space than twelve months.

5. In England the application for a summons need not be in writing, but generally it is so, as a form is prescribed by statute. A summons thereon is issued citing the defender to appear at petty sessions on a certain specified date and place, the interval being at least six days, and within forty days from the date of the summons. Elaborate forms of procedure have been framed by the Local Government Board under authority of the Act 1872. In Scotland the action is brought by a summons in the form adapted for all civil claims on an inducrae of six days which comes into court on the next ordinary Court Day. A copy of the summons is served personally or left at the defender's usual place of abode

by an officer of court, accompanied by one witness, and a formal declaration of the fact called "execution" is indorsed on the original summons, and is held the only evidence of citation unless challenged as false. The formula adopted in England before justices would be found altogether inapplicable to Scotland. But a more summary and economical form of procedure in such cases in Scotland is imperatively demanded than what is suited for ordinary cases of debt, which, unlike a demand for instant support, may abide the proverbial slow progress of judicial procedure.

6. If the defender in England fail to appear on the day named in the summons the justices take the oath of the party who served the summons of that fact, and then the sessions proceed ex parte to hear the evidence of the woman and other corroborative proof, or may adjourn the hearing. In Scotland if appearance be not entered by the defender by a notice lodged with the Clerk either by himself or an agent, decree is given in absence and without evidence. Against this decree the defender may be reponed at any time. until the decree be implemented voluntarily or by legal execution. The procedure in Scotland does appear to be best suited to the ends of justice, as the trial of a case, and especially one of so much delicacy ex parte, cannot be held satisfactory. The genius, however, of the English Law is adverse to decrees in default.

7. In England, either on appearance of the defender, or in his absence, the justices proceed to investigate the case, taking "the evidence of the woman and such other evidence as she may produce, and any evidence tendered by or on behalf of the defender, and if the evidence of the mother be corroborated in some material particular by other evidence to the satisfaction of the justices," an order for payment is issued against the defender. In England the mother's oath is always essential in evidence, and the defender may be a witness either called by the mother or by himself. In Scotland, where appearance has been entered, a record is made up, as in other ordinary causes for