Chapter XI: Part 11

Coroners are of three kinds: (1) coroners by virtue of their office, e.g. the lord chief justice of the king's bench is the principal coroner of England; the puisne judges of the king's bench are sovereign coroners--they may exercise their jurisdiction within any part of the realm, even in the verge[1] or other exempt liberties or franchises; (2) coroners by charter or commission, e.g. in certain liberties and franchises coroners are appointed by the crown or by lords holding a charter from the crown; (3) coroners by virtue of election, e.g. county and borough coroners. County coroners in England were, until 1888, elected by the freeholders, but by the Local Government Act 1888 the appointment was given to the county council, who may appoint any fit person, not being a county alderman or county councillor, to fill the office. By an act of 1860 the system of payment by fees, established by an act of 1843, was abolished and payment made by salary calculated on the average amount of the fees, mileage, and allowances usually received by the coroner for a period of five years, and the calculation revised every five years. In boroughs having a separate court of quarter sessions, and whose population exceeds 10,000, the coroner is appointed by the town council and is paid by fees. A county coroner must reside within his district or not more than two miles out of it. Deputy coroners are also appointed in both counties and boroughs, and the law relating to their appointment is contained in the Coroners Act 1892. The duties of a coroner were ascertained by 4 Edward I. st. 2:--"A coroner of our Lord the king ought to inquire of these things, first, when coroners are commanded by the king's bailiffs or by the honest men of the county, they shall go to the places where any be slain, or suddenly dead or wounded, or where houses are broken, or where treasure is said to be found, and shall forthwith command four of the next towns, or five, or six, to appear before him in such a place; and when they are come thither, the coroner upon the oath of them shall inquire in this manner, that is, to wit, if it concerns a man slain, if they know when the person was slain, whether it were in any house, field, bed, tavern, or company, and if any, and who, were there, &c. It shall also be inquired if the dead person were known, or else a stranger, and where he lay the night before. And if any person is said to be guilty of the murder, the coroner shall go to their house and inquire what goods they have, &c." Similar directions were given for cases of persons found drowned or suddenly dead, for attachment of criminals in cases of violence, &c. His functions are now, by the Coroners Act 1887, limited to an inquiry upon "the dead body of a person lying within his jurisdiction, where there is reasonable cause to suspect that such person has died either a violent or an unnatural death, or has died a sudden death of which the cause is unknown, or that such person has died in prison, or in such place or under such circumstances as to require an inquest in pursuance of any act" (S. 3), and upon treasure-trove (S. 36). The inquisition must be _super visum corporis_ (that is, after "viewing the body"); the evidence is taken on oath; and any party suspected may tender evidence. The Coroners Act 1887, S. 21, gives power to the coroner to summon medical witnesses and to direct the performance of a post-mortem examination. The verdict must be that of twelve at least of the jury. If any person is found guilty of murder or other homicide, the coroner shall commit him to prison for trial; he shall also certify the material evidence to the court, and bind over the proper persons to prosecute or to give evidence at the trial. He may in his discretion accept bail for a person found guilty of manslaughter. Since the abolition of public executions, the coroner is required to hold an inquest on the body of any criminal on whom sentence of death has been carried into effect. The duty of coroners to inquire into treasure-trove (q.v.) is still preserved by the Coroners Act 1887, which, however, repealed certain other jurisdictions, as,--inquests of royal fish (whale, sturgeon) thrown ashore or caught near the coast; inquest of wrecks, and of felonies, except felonies on inquisitions of death. By the City of London Fire Inquests Act 1888 the duty is imposed upon the coroner for the city to hold inquests in cases of loss or injury by fire in the city of London and the liberties thereof situated in the county of Middlesex. This is a practice which exists in several European countries.

In Scotland the duties of a coroner are performed by an officer called a procurator-fiscal.

In the United States and in most of the colonies of Great Britain the duties of a coroner are substantially the same. In some cases his duties are more enlarged, his inquisition embracing the origin of fires; in others they are confined to holding inquests in cases of suspicious deaths. Unlike a coroner in England, he is elected generally only for a specified period.

AUTHORITIES.--Jervis, _Office and Duties of Coroners_ (6th ed., 1898);
R. H. Wellington, _The King's Coroner_ (2 vols., 1905-1906). In 1908 a
committee was appointed to inquire into the law relating to coroners
and coroners' inquests and into the practice in coroners' courts.
(T. A. I.)

FOOTNOTE:

[1] _Coroner of the Verge._--The verge comprised a circuit of 12 m.
round the king's court, and the coroner of the king's house, called
the coroner of the verge, has jurisdiction within this radius. By the
Coroners Act 1887 the jurisdiction of the verge was abolished and
became absorbed in that of the county, but the appointment of the
king's coroner was left with the lord steward, while his jurisdiction
was limited to the precincts of the palace.

CORONIUM, that constituent (otherwise unknown) of the sun's corona, which emits the characteristic green coronal ray, of which the wave-length is 5303.

COROT, JEAN-BAPTISTE CAMILLE (1796-1875), French landscape painter, was born in Paris, in a house on the Quai by the rue du Bac, now demolished, on the 26th of July 1796. His family were well-to-do bourgeois people, and whatever may have been the experience of some of his artistic colleagues, he never, throughout his life, felt the want of money. He was educated at Rouen and was afterwards apprenticed to a draper, but hated commercial life and despised what he called its "business tricks," yet he faithfully remained in it until he was twenty-six, when his father at last consented to his adopting the profession of art. Corot learned little from his masters. He visited Italy on three occasions: two of his Roman studies are now in the Louvre. He was a regular contributor to the Salon during his lifetime, and in 1846 was "decorated" with the cross of the Legion of Honour. He was promoted to be officer in 1867. His many friends considered nevertheless that he was officially neglected, and in 1874, only a short time before his death, they presented him with a gold medal. He died in Paris, on the 22nd of February 1875, and was buried at Pere Lachaise.

Of the painters classed in the Barbizon school it is probable that Corot will live the longest, and will continue to occupy the highest position. His art is more individual than Rousseau's, whose works are more strictly traditional; more poetic than that of Daubigny, who is, however, Corot's greatest contemporary rival; and in every sense more beautiful than J. F. Millet, who thought more of stern truth than of aesthetic feeling.

Corot's works are somewhat arbitrarily divided into periods, but the point of division is never certain, as he often completed a picture years after it had been begun. In his first style he painted traditionally and "tight"--that is to say, with minute exactness, clear outlines, and with absolute definition of objects throughout. After his fiftieth year his methods changed to breadth of tone and an approach to poetic power, and about twenty years later, say from 1865 onwards, his manner of painting became full of "mystery" and poetry. In the last ten years of his work he became the Pere Corot of the artistic circles of Paris, in which he was regarded with personal affection, and he was acknowledged as one of the five or six greatest landscape painters the world has ever seen, along with Hobbema, Claude, Turner and Constable. During the last few years of his life he earned large sums by his pictures, which became greatly sought after. In 1871 he gave L2000 for the poor of Paris (where he remained during the siege), and his continued charity was long the subject of remark. Besides landscapes, of which he painted several hundred, Corot produced a number of figure pictures which are much prized. These were mostly studio pieces, executed probably with a view to keep his hand in with severe drawing, rather than with the intention of producing pictures. Yet many of them are fine in composition, and in all cases the colour is remarkable for its strength and purity. Corot also executed a few etchings and pencil sketches. In his landscape pictures Corot was more traditional in his method of work than is usually believed. If even his latest tree-painting and arrangement are compared with such a Claude as that which hangs in the Bridgewater gallery, it will be observed how similar is Corot's method and also how masterly are his results.

The works of Corot are scattered over France and the Netherlands, Great Britain and America. The following may be considered as the first half-dozen: "Une Matinee" (1850), now in the Louvre; "Macbeth" (1859), in the Wallace collection: "Le Lac" (1861); "L'Arbre brise" (1865): "Pastorale--Souvenir d'Italie" (1873), in the Glasgow Corporation Art Gallery; "Biblis" (1875). Corot had a number of followers who called themselves his pupils. The best known are Boudin, Lepine, Chintreuil, Francais and Le Roux.

AUTHORITIES.--H. Dumesnil. _Souvenirs intimes_ (Paris, 1875);
Roger-Miles, _Les Artistes celebres: Corot_ (Paris, 1891);
Roger-Miles, _Album classique des chefs-d'oeuvres de Corot_ (Paris,
1895); J. Rousseau, _Bibliotheque d'art moderne: Camille Corot_
(Paris, 1884); J. Claretie, _Peintres et sculpteurs contemporains:
Corot_ (Paris, 1884); Ch. Bigot, _Peintres francais contemporains:
Corot_ (Paris, 1888); Geo. Moore, _Ingres and Corot in Modern
Painting_ (London, 1893); David Croal Thomson, _Corot_ (4to, London,
1892); Mrs Schuyler van Rensselaer, "Corot," _Century Magazine_ (June
1889); Corot, _The Portfolio_ (1870), p. 60, (1875) p. 146; R. A. M.
Stevenson, "Corot as an Example of Style in Painting," _Scottish Art
Review_ (Aug. 1888); Ethel Birnstigl and Alice Pollard, _Corot_
(London, 1904); Alfred Robaut, _L'OEuvre de Corot, catalogue
raisonne et illustre, precede de l'histoire de Corot et de ses
oeuvres par Etienne Morceau-Nelaton_ (Paris, 1905). (D. C. T.)

CORPORAL. 1. (From Lat. _corporalis_, belonging to the _corpus_ or body), an adjective appearing in several expressions, such as "corporal punishment" (see below), or in "corporal works of mercy," for those acts confined to the succouring of the bodily needs, such as feeding the hungry, visiting the sick, rescuing captives. A "corporal oath" was sworn with the body in contact with a sacred object (see OATH).

2. (From Lat. _corporalis_, sc. _palla_, or _corporale_, sc. _pallium_), in the Roman Catholic Church, a small square linen cloth, which at the service of the Mass is placed on the altar under the chalice and paten. It was originally large enough to cover the whole surface of the altar, and was folded over so as to cover the chalice--a custom still observed by the Carthusians. The chalice is now, however, covered by another small square of linen, stiffened with cardboard, &c., known as the pall (_palla_). When not in use both corporal and pall are carried in a square silken pocket called the burse. The corporal must be blessed by the bishop, or by a priest with special faculties, the ritual prayers invoking the divine blessing that the linen may be worthy to cover and enwrap the body and blood of the Lord. It represents the winding-sheet in which Joseph of Arimathea wrapped the body of the dead Christ.

3. (Of uncertain derivation; the French form _caporal_, and Ital. _caporale_, point to an origin from _capo_, Italian for head; the _New English Dictionary_, however, favours the derivation from Lat. _corpus_, Ital. _corpo_, body), a non-commissioned officer of infantry, cavalry and artillery, ranking below a sergeant. This rank is almost universal in armies. In the 16th and 17th centuries there were corporals but no sergeants in the cavalry, and this custom is preserved in the three regiments of British household cavalry, the rank of sergeant being replaced by that of "corporal of horse," and that of sergeant-major by "corporal-major." In the 16th and early 17th centuries the title "corporal of the field" was often given to a superior officer who acted as a staff-officer to the sergeant-major-general. In the navy the "ship's corporal," formerly a semi-military instructor to the crew, is now a petty officer charged with assisting the master-at-arms in police duties on board ship.

CORPORAL PUNISHMENT, chastisement inflicted by one person on the body (_corpus_) of another. By the common law of England, Scotland and Ireland, the infliction of corporal punishment is illegal unless it is done in self-defence or in defence of others, or is done either by some person having punitive authority over the person chastised or under the authority of a competent court of justice. Corporal punishment in defence of self or others needs no comment, except that, like all other acts done in defence, its justification depends on whether or not it was reasonably necessary for the protection of the person attacked. Among persons invested with punitive authority, mention must first be made of parents and guardians, and of teachers, who have, by implied delegation from the parents, and as incidental to the relation of master and pupil, powers of reasonable corporal punishment. Such powers are not limited to offences committed by the pupil upon the premises of the school, but extend to acts done on the way to and from school and during what may be properly regarded as school hours (_Cleary_ v. _Booth_, 1893, 1 Q.B. 465). The rights of parents, guardians and teachers, in regard to the chastisement of children, were expressly recognized in English law by the Prevention of Cruelty to Children Act 1904 (S 28). Poor law authorities and managers of reformatories are in the same position in this respect as teachers. The punitive authority of elementary school teachers is subject to the regulations of the education authority: that of poor law authorities to the regulation of the Home Office and the Local Government Board. A master has a right to inflict moderate chastisement upon his apprentice for neglect or other misbehaviour, provided that he does so himself, and that the apprentice is under age (Archbold, _Cr. Pl._, 23rd ed., 795). Where a legal right of chastisement is exercised immoderately, the person so exercising it incurs both civil and criminal liability.

In some of the older English legal authorities (e.g. Bacon, Abridg. tit. "Baron and Feme," B), it was stated that a husband might inflict moderate corporal punishment on his wife in order to keep her "within the bounds of duty." But these authorities were definitely discredited in 1891 in the case of _R._ v. _Jackson_ (1 Q.B. 671). By the unmodified Mahommedan law, a husband may administer moderate corporal punishment to his wife; but it is doubtful whether this right could be legally exercised in British India (Wilson, _Digest of Anglo-Mahommedan Law_, 2nd ed., pp. 153, 154). In Hawkins's _Pleas of the Crown_ (Bk. 1, c. 63, S 29) it is laid down that "churchwardens, and perhaps private persons, may whip boys playing in church" during divine service. But while the right to remove such offenders is undoubted, the right of castigation could not now safely be exercised. At common law the master of a ship is entitled to inflict reasonable chastisement on a seaman for gross breach of duty. But such offences are now specially provided for by the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 (SS 220-238); and where the provisions of that statute are available, corporal punishment would probably be illegal.

As to corporal punishment in the army and navy, see articles MILITARY
LAW; NAVY. In civil prisons, whether they are convict prisons or local
prisons, corporal punishment may not be inflicted except under
sentence of a competent court, or except in the case of prisoners
under sentence of penal servitude, or convicted of felony, or
sentenced to hard labour, who have been guilty of mutiny or incitement
to mutiny, or of gross personal violence to an officer or servant of
the prison (Act of 1898, S 5). Flogging for these offences in prison
may not be inflicted except by order of the board of visitors or
visiting committee of the prison, made at a meeting specially
constituted, and confirmed by a secretary of state (Prison Act of
1898, S 5; Convict Prison Rules 1899; Stat. R. and O. 1899, No. 321,
rr. 77-79; Local Prison Rules 1899; Stat. R. and O. 1899, No. 322, rr.
84, 85). The mode of inflicting the punishment is prescribed by the
Convict Prison Rules (rr. 82-85) and the Local Prison Rules (rr.
88-91), which limit the number of strokes and prescribe the instrument
to be used for inflicting them, the cat or birch for prisoners over
18, and the birch for prisoners under 18.

Corporal punishment for breaches of prison discipline in Scottish
prisons is not authorized by any statute nor under the Scottish Prison
Rules (see _Stat. R. and O. Revised_, ed. 1904, vol. X. tit. "Prison,
Scotland," p. 60). In Irish convict prisons corporal punishment may be
inflicted by order of justices specially appointed by the
lord-lieutenant under S 3 of the Penal Servitude Act 1864, but the
Irish Prison Rules of 1902 (Stat. R. and O. 1902, No. 590) contain no
reference to this power.

At common law, courts of justice had jurisdiction to impose a sentence of whipping on persons convicted on indictment for petty larceny or misdemeanours of the meaner kind (see 1 Bishop, _Amer. Cr. Law_, 8th ed., S 942). But they do not now impose such sentence except under statutory authority. The whipping of women was absolutely prohibited in 1820 by the Whipping of Female Offenders Abolition Act of that year. But there are numerous statutes authorizing the imposition of a sentence of whipping on male offenders. The following cases may be noted. 1. _Adults_: (a) who are incorrigible rogues (Vagrancy Act 1824, S 10); (b) who discharge fire-arms, &c., with intent to injure or alarm the sovereign (Treason Act 1842, S 2, and see 8 St. Tr. N.S. 1, and _O'Connor's Case_, 1872, ib. p. 3 n.); (c) who are guilty of robbery with violence (Larceny Act 1861, S 43), or offences against S 21 of the Offences against the Person Act of 1861; there has been much controversy as to whether the Garrotters Act of 1861, which authorized the ordering of more than one whipping in the case of an offender over 16 years of age, was the effective cause of the diminution of the offences against which it was directed, but the best judicial opinion is in the affirmative. 2. _Males under sixteen_: (a) in any of the cases above noted; (b) for many statutory offences, e.g. larceny (Larceny Act 1861), malicious damage (Malicious Damage Act 1861, S 75; Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885, S 4); (c) by courts of summary jurisdiction (Summary Jurisdiction Act 1879, SS 10, 11, and 1899; First Offenders Act 1887); if a boy is over 7 and under 12, not more than 6 strokes, if he is over 12, but under 14, not more than 12 strokes may be inflicted; the birch-rod is to be used, and the punishment is to be given by a police constable in the presence of a superior officer, and of the parent or guardian if he desire it.

In Scotland the whipping of male offenders under 14 is regulated by
the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1860, S 74, the Whipping Act 1862, and S
514 of the Burgh Police (Scotland) Act 1892; and offenders over 16 may
not be whipped for offences against person or property (Whipping Act
1862, S 2).

In Ireland the law is in substance the same as in England; for special
statutes see official _Index to Statutes_ (ed. 1905), p. 985, art.
Punishment, 6.

The flogging of women is prohibited throughout British India (Code of
Criminal Procedure, Act v. of 1898, S 393) and the British colonies,
where the infliction of corporal punishment by judicial order is in
the main regulated on the lines of modern English legislation. In some
British colonies the list of offences punishable by whipping is larger
than in England (see Queensland Criminal Code 1899, arts. 212, 213,
216).

In the United States whipping is not a legal punishment under the Federal Law (Revised Stats. U.S. S 5327). But in some of the states of the Union whipping is inflicted under statute, and is not held cruel or unusual within the Federal Constitution (1 Bishop, _Amer. Crim. Law_, 8th ed., S 947). In Delaware wife-beating and certain offences against property by males are punishable with flogging; and in Maryland the same punishment is applicable for wife-beating. Flogging is in force as a disciplinary measure in some penal institutions.

It has been suggested by Laurent (_Principes de droit civil francais_ (1870), vol. iv. S 275) that the express definition in the French Code Civil (arts. 371 et seq.) of parental rights over children excludes the power of corporal punishment. But this view is not generally accepted. The parental right of moderate chastisement is expressly reserved in the Civil Code of Spain (art. 155, 2). Flogging is not recognized as a legal punishment by the French Code Penal, nor by the Penal Codes of Germany, Italy, Spain or Portugal. (See also WHIPPING OR FLOGGING.) (A. W. R.)

CORPORATION (from Lat. _corporare_, to form into a body, _corpus_, _corporis_), in English law, an association of persons which is treated in many respects as if it were itself a person. It has rights and duties of its own which are not the rights and duties of the individual members thereof. Thus a corporation may own land, but the individual members of the corporation have no rights therein. A corporation may owe money, but the corporators as individuals are under no obligation to pay the debt. The rights and duties descend to the successive members of the corporation. This capacity of perpetual succession is regarded as the distinguishing feature of corporations as compared with other societies. One of the phrases most commonly met with in law-books describes a corporation as a society with perpetual succession and a common seal. The latter point, however, is not conclusive of the corporate character.

The legal attributes of a corporation have been worked out with great fulness and ingenuity in English law, but the conception has been taken full-grown from the law of Rome. The term in Roman law corresponding to the modern corporation is _collegium_; a more general term is _universitas_. A _collegium_ or _corpus_ must have consisted of at least three persons, who were said to be _corporati--habere corpus_. They could hold property in common and had a common chest. They might sue and be sued by their agent (_syndicus_ or _actor_). There was a complete separation in law between the rights of the _collegium_ as a body and those of its individual members. The _collegium_ remained in existence although all its original members were changed. It was governed by its own by-laws, provided these were not contrary to the common law. The power of forming _collegia_ was restrained, and societies pretending to act as corporations were often suppressed. In all these points the _collegia_ of Roman closely resemble the corporations of English law. There is a similar parallel between the purposes for which the formation of such societies is authorized in English and in Roman law. Thus among the Roman _collegia_ the following classes are distinguished:--(1) Public governing bodies, or municipalities, _civitates_; (2) religious societies, such as the _collegia_ of priests and Vestal Virgins; (3) official societies, e.g. the _scribae_, employed in the administration of the state; (4) trade societies, e.g. _fabri_, _pictores_, _navicularii_, &c. This class shades down into the _societates_ not incorporated, just as our own trading corporations partake largely of the character of ordinary partnerships. In the later Roman law the distinction of corporations into civil and ecclesiastical, into lay and eleemosynary, is recognized. The latter could not alienate without just cause, nor take land without a licence--a restriction which may be compared with modern statutes of mortmain. All these privileged societies are what we should call _corporations aggregate_. The _corporation sole_ (i.e. consisting of only a single person) is a later refinement, for although Roman law held that the corporation subsisted in full force, notwithstanding that only one member survived, it did not impute to the successive holders of a public office the character of a corporation. When a public officer in English law is said to be a corporation sole, the meaning is that the rights acquired by him in that capacity descend to his successor in office, and not (as the case is where a public officer is not a corporation) to his ordinary legal representative. The best known instances of corporation sole are the king and the parson of a parish. The conception of the king as a corporation is the key to many of his paradoxical attributes in constitutional theory--his invisibility, immortality, &c.

The term _quasi-corporation_ is applied to holders for the time being of certain official positions, though not incorporated, as the churchwardens of a parish, guardians of the poor, &c.

The Roman conception of a corporation was kept alive by ecclesiastical and municipal bodies. When English lawyers came to deal with such societies, the corporation law of Rome admitted of easy application. Accordingly, in no department has English law borrowed so copiously and so directly from the civil law. The corporations known to the earlier English law were mainly the municipal, the ecclesiastical, and the educational and eleemosynary. To all of these the same principles, borrowed from Roman jurisprudence, were applied. The different purposes of these institutions brought about in course of time differences in the rules of the law applicable to each. In particular, the great development of trading companies under special statutes has produced a new class of corporations, differing widely from those formerly known to the law. The reform of municipal corporations has also restricted the operation of the principles of the older corporation law. These principles, however, still apply when special statutes have not intervened.

The legal origin of corporation is ascribed by J. Grant (_Treatise on the Law of Corporations_, 1850) to five sources, viz. common law, prescription, act of parliament, charter and implication. Prescription in legal theory implies a grant, so that corporations by prescription would be reducible to the class of chartered or statutory corporations. A corporation is said to exist by implication when the purposes of a legally constituted society cannot be carried out without corporate powers. Corporations are thus ultimately traceable to the authority of charters and acts of parliament. The power of creating corporations by charter is an important prerogative of the crown, but in the present state of the constitution, when all the powers of the crown are practically exercised by parliament, there is no room for any jealousy as to the manner in which it may be exercised. The power of chartering corporations belonged also to subjects who had _jura regalia_, e.g. the bishops of Durham granted a charter of incorporation to the city of Durham in 1565, 1602 and 1780. The charter of a corporation is regarded as being of the nature of a contract between the king and the corporation. It will be construed more favourably for the crown, and more strictly as against the grantee. It cannot alter the law of the land, and it may be surrendered, so that, if the surrender is accepted by the crown and enrolled in chancery, the corporation is thereby dissolved. Great use was made of this power of the crown in the reigns of Charles II. and James II.

Every corporation, it is said, must have a name, and it may have more names than one, but two corporations cannot have the same name. And corporations cannot change their name save by charter or some equivalent authority.

The possession of a common seal, though, as already stated, not conclusive of the corporate character, is an incident of every corporation aggregate. The inns of courts have common seals, but they are only voluntary societies, not corporations. Generally speaking, all corporate acts affecting strangers must be performed under the common seal; acts of internal administration affecting only the corporators, need not be under seal. The rule has been defended as following necessarily from the impersonal character of a corporation; either a seal or something equivalent must be fixed upon so that the act of the corporation may be recognized by all.

A corporation may be abolished by statute, but not by the mere authority of the crown. It may also become extinct by the disappearance of all its members or of any integral part, by surrender of charter if it is a chartered society, by process of law, or by forfeiture of privileges.

The power of the majority to bind the society is one of the first principles of corporation law, even in cases where the corporation has a head. It is even said that only by an act of parliament can this rule be avoided. The binding majority is that of the number present at a corporate meeting duly summoned.

In corporations which have a head (as colleges), although the head cannot veto the resolution of the majority, he is still considered an integral part of the society, and his death suspends its existence, so that a head cannot devise or bequeath to the corporation, nor can a grant be made to a corporation during vacancy of the headship.

A corporation has power to make such regulations (by-laws) as are necessary for carrying out its purposes, and these are binding on its members and on persons within its local jurisdiction if it has any.

The power to acquire and hold land was incident to a corporation at common law, but its restriction by the statutes of mortmain dates from a very early period. The English law against mortmain was dictated by the jealousy of the feudal lords, who lost the services they would otherwise have been entitled to, when their land passed into the hands of a perpetual corporation. The vast increase in the estates of ecclesiastical corporations constituted by itself a danger which might well justify the operation of the restricting statutes.

The Mortmain Acts applied only to cases of alienation _inter vivos_. There was no power to devise lands by will until 32 Henry VIII. c. 1 (1540), and when the power was granted corporations were expressly excluded from its benefits. No devise to a corporation, whether for its own use or in trust, was allowed to be good; land so devised went to the heir, either absolutely or charged with the trusts imposed upon it in the abortive devise. A modification, however, was gradually wrought by the judicial interpretations of the Charitable Trusts Act 1601, and it was held that a devise to a corporation for a charitable purpose might be a good devise, and would stand unless voided by the Mortmain Acts; so that no corporation could take land, without a licence, for any purpose or in any way; and no localised corporation could take lands by devise, save for charitable purposes. Then came the act of 1736, commonly but improperly called the Mortmain Act. Its effect was generally to make it impossible for land to be left by will for charitable uses, whether through a corporation or a natural person[1]. The Wills Act 1837 did not renew the old provision against devises to corporations, which therefore fell under the general law of mortmain. The law was consolidated by the Mortmain and Charitable Uses Act 1888, and the result is simply that corporations cannot take land for any purpose without a licence, and no licence in mortmain is granted by the crown, except in certain statutory cases in the interests of religion, charity or other definite public object.

The power of corporations at common law to alienate their property is usually restricted, as is their power to lease it for more than a certain number of years, except by sanction of a public authority. The more important classes of corporations, however, are now governed by special statutes which exclude or modify the operation of the common law principles. The most considerable class of societies still unaffected by such special legislation are the Livery Companies (q.v.). Under COMPANY will be found an account of the important enactments regulating joint-stock companies.

The question to what extent the common law incidents of a corporation have been interfered with by special legislation has become one of much importance, especially under the acts relating to joint-stock companies. The most important case on this subject is that of _Riche_ v. _The Ashbury Railway Carriage Company_, 1875 (L.R. 9 Ex. 224; L.R. 7 H.L. 653), in which, the judges of the exchequer chamber being equally divided, the decision of the court below was affirmed. The view taken by the affirming judges, viz. that the common law incidents of a corporation adhere unless expressly removed by the legislature, may be illustrated by a short extract from the judgment of Mr Justice Blackburn:--

"If I thought it was at common law an incident to a corporation that
its capacity should be limited by the instrument creating it, I should
agree that the capacity of a company incorporated under the act of
1862 was limited to the object in the memorandum of association. But
if I am right in the opinion which I have already expressed, that the
general power of contracting is an incident to a corporation which it
requires an indication of intention in the legislature to take away, I
see no such indication here. If the question was whether the
legislature had conferred on a corporation, created under this act,
capacity to enter into contracts beyond the provisions of the deed,
there could be only one answer. The legislature did not confer such
capacity. But if the question be, as I apprehend it is, whether the
legislature have indicated an intention to take away the power of
contracting which at common law would be incident to a body corporate,
and not merely to limit the authority of the managing body and the
majority of the share-holders to bind the minority, but also to
prohibit and make illegal contracts made by the body corporate, in
such a manner that they would be binding on the body if incorporated
at common law, I think the answer should be the other way."

On the other hand, the House of Lords, agreeing with the three dissentient judges in the exchequer chamber, pronounced the effect of the Companies Act to be the opposite of that indicated by Mr Justice Blackburn, "It was the intention of the legislature, not implied, but actually expressed, that the corporations, should not enter, having regard to this memorandum of association, into a contract of this description. The contract in my judgment could not have been ratified by the unanimous assent of the whole corporation." In such companies, therefore, objects beyond the scope of the memorandum of association are _ultra vires_ of the corporation. The doctrine of _ultra vires_, as it is called, is almost wholly of modern and judicial creation. The first emphatic recognition of it appears to have been in the case of companies created for special purposes with extraordinary powers, by act of parliament, and, more particularly, railway companies. The funds of such companies, it was held, must be applied to the purposes for which they were created, and to no other. Whether this doctrine is applicable to the older or, as they are sometimes called, ordinary corporations, appears to be doubtful. S. Brice (_Ultra Vires_) writes:--

"Take, as a strong instance, a university or a London guild. Either
can undoubtedly manage, invest, transform and expend the corporate
property in almost any way it pleases, but if they proposed to exhaust
the same on the private pleasures of existing members, or to abandon
the promotion, the one of education, the other of their art and
mystery, it is very probable, if not absolutely certain, that the
court of chancery would restrain the same, as being _ultra vires_."

FOOTNOTE:

[1] Devises to colleges are excepted from the operation of the act,
but such devises must be for purposes identical with or closely
resembling the original purposes of the college; and the exception
from this act does not supersede the necessity for a licence in
mortmain.

CORPS (pronounced as in French, from which it is taken, being a late spelling of _cors_, from Lat. _corpus_, a body; cf. "corpse"), a word in very general use since the 17th century to denote a body of troops, varying from a few hundred to the greater part of an army. In a special sense "corps" is used as synonymous with "army corps" (_corps d'armee_). The word is applied to any organized body, as in _corps diplomatique_, the general body of foreign diplomatic agents accredited to any government (see DIPLOMACY), or _corps de ballet_, the members of a troop of dancers at a theatre; so in _esprit de corps_, the common spirit of loyalty which animates any body of associated persons.

CORPSE (Lat. _corpus_, the body), a dead human body. By the common law of England a corpse is not the subject of property nor capable of holding property. It is not therefore larceny to steal a corpse, but any removal of the coffin or grave-cloths is otherwise, such remaining the property of the persons who buried the body. It is a misdemeanour to expose a naked corpse to public view, to prevent the burial of a dead body, or to disinter it without authority; also to bury or otherwise dispose of a dead body on which an inquest ought to be held, without giving notice to a coroner. Anyone who, having the means, neglects to bury a dead body which he is legally bound to bury, is guilty of a misdemeanour, but no one is bound to incur a debt for such a purpose. It is incumbent on the relatives and friends of a deceased person to provide Christian burial for him; failing relatives and friends, the duty devolves upon the parish. No corpse can be attached, taken in execution, arrested or detained for debt. See further BODY-SNATCHING, and BURIAL AND BURIAL ACTS.

CORPULENCE (Lat. _corpus_, body), or OBESITY (Lat. _ob_, against, and _edere_, to eat), a condition of the animal body characterized by the over-accumulation of fat under the skin and around certain of the internal organs. In all healthy persons a greater or less amount of fat is present in these parts, and serves important physiological ends, besides contributing to the proper configuration of the body (see NUTRITION). Even a considerable measure of fatness, however inconvenient, is not inconsistent with a high degree of health and activity, and it is only when in great excess or rapidly increasing that it can be regarded as a pathological state (see METABOLIC DISEASES). The extent to which excess of fat may proceed is illustrated by numerous well-authenticated examples recorded in medical works, of which only a few can be here mentioned. Thus Bright, a grocer of Maldon, in Essex, who died in 1750, in his twenty-ninth year, weighed 616 [lb]. Dr F. Dancel (_Traite de l'obesite_, Paris, 1863) records the case of a young man of twenty-two, who died from excessive obesity, weighing 643 [lb]. In the _Philosophical Transactions_ for 1813 a case is recorded of a girl of four years of age who weighed 256 [lb]. But the most celebrated case is that of Daniel Lambert (q.v.) of Leicester, who died in 1809 in his fortieth year. He is said to have been the heaviest man that ever lived, his weight being 739 [lb] (52 st. 11 [lb]). Health cannot be long maintained under excessive obesity, for the increase in bulk of the body, rendering exercise more difficult, leads to relaxation and defective nutrition of muscle, while the accumulations of fat in the chest and abdomen occasion serious embarrassment to the functions of the various organs in those cavities. In general the mental activity of the highly corpulent becomes impaired, although there have always been many notable exceptions to this rule.

Various causes are assigned for the production of corpulence (see METABOLIC DISEASES). In some families there exists an hereditary predisposition to an obese habit of body, the manifestation of which no precautions as to living appear capable of averting. But it is unquestionable that certain habits favour the occurrence of corpulence. A luxurious, inactive, or sedentary life, with over-indulgence in sleep and absence of mental occupation, are well recognized predisposing causes. The more immediate exciting causes are over-feeding and the large use of fluids of any kind, but especially alcoholic liquors. Fat persons are not always great eaters, though many of them are, while leanness and inordinate appetite are not infrequently associated. Still, it may be stated generally that indulgence in food, beyond what is requisite to repair daily waste, goes towards the increase of flesh, particularly of fat. This is more especially the case when the non-nitrogenous (the fatty, saccharine and starchy) elements of the food are in excess. The want of adequate bodily exercise will in a similar manner produce a like effect, and it is probable that many cases of corpulence are to be ascribed to this cause alone, from the well-known facts that many persons of sedentary occupation become stout, although of most abstemious habits, and that obesity frequently comes on in the middle-aged and old, who take relatively less exercise than the young, in whom it is comparatively rare. Women are more prone to become corpulent than men, and appear to take on this condition more readily after the cessation of the function of menstruation.

For the prevention of corpulence and the reduction of superfluous fat many expedients have been resorted to, and numerous remedies recommended. These have included bleeding, blistering, purging, starving (see FASTING), the use of different kinds of baths, and of drugs innumerable. The drinking of vinegar was long popularly, but erroneously, supposed to be a remedy for obesity. It is related of the marquis of Cortona, a noted general of the duke of Alva, that by drinking vinegar he so reduced his body from a condition of enormous obesity that he could fold his skin about him like a garment.

In 1863 a pamphlet entitled "Letter on Corpulence, Addressed to the Public by William Banting," in which was narrated the remarkable experience of the writer in accomplishing the reduction of his own weight in a short space of time by the adoption of a particular kind of diet, started the modern dietetic treatment, at first called "Banting" after the author. After trying almost every known remedy without effect, Banting was induced, on the suggestion of Mr Harvey, a London aurist, to place himself upon an entirely new form of diet, which consisted chiefly in the removal, as far as possible, of all saccharine, starchy and fat food, the reduction of liquids, and the substitution of meat or fish and fruit in moderate quantity at each meal, together with the daily use of an antacid draught. Under this regimen his weight was reduced 46 [lb] in the course of a few weeks, while his health underwent a marked improvement. His experience, as might have been expected, induced many to follow his example; and since then various regimens have been propounded, all aiming at treating corpulence on modern physiological principles (see also DIETETICS, METABOLIC DISEASES and NUTRITION). It is important, however, to bear in mind that the treatment should be followed under medical advice and observation; for, however desirable it be to get rid of superabundant fat, it would be manifestly no gain were this to be achieved by the sacrifice of the general health.

CORPUS CHRISTI, a city and the county-seat of Nueces county, Texas, U.S.A., situated on Corpus Christi Bay opposite the mouth of the Nueces river, 192 m. W.S.W. of Galveston and about 150 m. S.S.E. of San Antonio. Pop. (1890) 4387; (1900) 4703, including 963 foreign-born and 460 negroes; (1910) 8299. It is served by the National of Mexico, the St Louis, Brownsville & Mexico, and the San Antonio & Aransas Pass railways. In 1908 the Federal government began work on a project to connect Corpus Christi harbour with Aransas Pass by a channel 8-1/2 ft. deep at low water and 75 ft. wide at the bottom, following a natural depression between the two bays. Corpus Christi is a summer and winter resort, with a very dry equable climate (average annual mean, 70.2 deg. F.) and good bathing on the horseshoe beach of Corpus Christi Bay. The city has an extensive coasting trade, and exports fruit, early vegetables, fish and oysters. There was a small Spanish settlement here at an early date, but no American settlement was made until after the Mexican War. Corpus Christi was the base from which General Zachary Taylor made his forward movement to the Rio Grande in 1846. It was chartered as a city in 1876.

CORPUS CHRISTI, FEAST OF (Lat. _festum corporis Christi_, i.e. festival of the Body of Christ, Fr. _fete-Dieu_ or _fete du sacrement_, Ger. _Frohnleichnamsfest_), a festival of the Roman Catholic Church in honour of the Real Presence of Christ in the sacrament of the altar, observed on the first Thursday after Trinity Sunday. The doctrine of transubstantiation was defined by the Lateran Council in 1215, and shortly afterwards the elevation and adoration of the Host were formally enjoined. This naturally stimulated the popular devotion to the Blessed Sacrament, which had been already widespread before the definition of the dogma. The movement was especially strong in the diocese of Liege, and when Julienne, prioress of Mont-Cornillon near Liege (1222-1258), had a vision in which the need for the establishment of a festival in honour of the Sacrament was revealed to her, the matter was taken up with enthusiasm by the clergy, and in 1246 Robert de Torote, bishop of Liege, instituted such a festival for his diocese. The idea, however, did not spread until, in 1261, Jacob Pantaleon, archdeacon of Liege, ascended the papal throne as Urban IV. By a bull of 1264 Urban made the festival, hitherto practically confined to the diocese of Liege, obligatory on the whole Church,[1] and a new office for the festival was written by Thomas Aquinas himself. As yet the stress was laid on reverence for the Holy Sacrament as a whole; there is no mention in Urban's bull of the solemn procession and exposition of the Host for the adoration of the faithful, which are the main features of the festival as at present celebrated. Urban's bull was once more promulgated, at the council of Vienne in 1311, by Pope Clement V.; and the procession of the Host in connexion with the festival was instituted, if the accounts we possess are trustworthy, by Pope John XXII.

From this time onwards the festival increased in popularity and in splendour. It became in effect the principal feast of the Church, the procession of the Sacrament a gorgeous pageant, in which not only the members of the trade and craft gilds, with the magistrates of the cities, took part, but princes and sovereigns. It thus became in a high degree symbolical of the exaltation of the sacerdotal power.[2] In the 15th century the custom became almost universal of following the procession with the performance of miracle-plays and mysteries, generally arranged and acted by members of the gilds who had formed part of the pageant.

The rejection of the doctrine of transubstantiation at the Reformation naturally involved the suppression of the festival of Corpus Christi in the reformed Churches. Luther, in spite of his belief in the Real Presence, regarded it as the most harmful of all the medieval festivals and, though he fully realized its popularity, it was the first that he abolished. This attitude of the reformers towards the festival, however, intensified by their abhorrence of the traffic in indulgences with which it had become closely associated, only tended to establish it more firmly among the adherents of the "old religion." The procession of the Host on Corpus Christi day became, as it were, a public demonstration of Catholic orthodoxy against Protestantism and later against religious Liberalism. In most countries where religious opinion is sharply divided the procession of Corpus Christi is therefore now forbidden, even when Catholicism is the dominant religion. In England occasional breaches of the law in this respect have been for some time tolerated, as in the case of the Corpus Christi procession annually held by the Italian community in London. An attempt to hold a public procession of the Host in connexion with the Eucharistic Congress at Westminster in 1908, however, was the signal for the outburst of a considerable amount of opposition, and was eventually abandoned owing to the personal intervention of the prime minister.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] The pope's decision, so the story goes, was hastened by a
miracle. A priest, saying mass at the church of Santa Christina at
Bolsena, was troubled, after the consecration, with grave doubts as
to the truth of the doctrine of transubstantiation. His temptation
was removed by the Host beginning to bleed, the blood soaking through
the corporal _into_ the marble of the altar.

[2] Nothing caused more offence to Liberal sentiment in France after
the Restoration than the spectacle of King Louis XVIII. walking and
carrying a candle in the procession through the streets of Paris.

CORRAL (Span. from _corro_, a circle), a word used chiefly in Spanish America and the United States for an enclosure for cattle and horses, and also for a defensive circle formed of wagons against attacks from Indians. It is also used as a verb, meaning to drive into a corral, and so figuratively to enclose, hem in. The word is probably connected with the South African Dutch word kraal (q.v.). In Ceylon it is especially used for an enclosure meant for the capture of wild elephants. In this last sense of the word the corresponding term in India is keddah (q.v.).

CORREA, a genus of Australian plants belonging to the natural order Rutaceae, named after the Portuguese botanist Jose Francisco Correa da Serra. The plants are evergreen shrubs and extremely useful for winter flowering. They are increased by cuttings, and grown in a cool greenhouse in rough peaty soil, with a slight addition of loam and sand. After the plants have done flowering, they should all get a little artificial warmth, plenty of moisture, and a slight shade, while they are making their growth, during which period the tips of the young shoots should be nipped out when 6 or 8 in. long. When the growth is complete, a half-shady place outdoors during August and September will be suitable, with protection from parching winds and hot sunshine.

CORREA DA SERRA, JOSE FRANCISCO (1750-1823), Portuguese politician and man of science, was born at Serpa, in Alemtejo, in 1750. Educated at Rome, he took orders under the protection of the duke of Alafoes, uncle of Mary I. of Portugal. In 1777 he returned to Lisbon, where he resided with his patron, with whose assistance he founded the Portuguese Academy of Sciences. Of this institution he was named perpetual secretary, and he received the privilege of publishing its transactions without reference to any censor whatever. His use of this right brought him into conflict with the Holy Office; and consequently in 1786 he fled to France, and remained there till the death of Pedro III., when he again took up his residence with Alafoes. But having given a lodging in the palace to a French Girondist, he was forced to flee to England, where he found a protector in Sir Joseph Banks, and became a member of the Royal Society. In 1797 he was appointed secretary to the Portuguese embassy, but a quarrel with the ambassador drove him once more to Paris (1802), and in that city he resided till 1813, when he crossed over to New York. In 1816 he was made Portuguese minister-plenipotentiary at Washington, and in 1820 he was recalled home, appointed a member of the financial council, and elected to a seat in the Cortes. Three years after, and in the same year with the fall of the constitutional government, he died. Correa da Serra ranks high as a botanist, though he published no great special work. His principal claim to renown is the _Coleccao de livros ineditos da historia Portugueza_, (4 vols., 1790-1816), an invaluable selection of documents, exceedingly well edited.