Chapter M: O. B. C (1)

MAXIMILIAN OTTO BISMARCK CASPARI, M.A.

Reader in Ancient History at London University. Lecturer in Greek
at Birmingham University, 1905-1908.

Irene (752-803).

N. M.
NORMAN MCLEAN, M.A.

Fellow, Lecturer and Librarian of Christ's College, Cambridge.
University Lecturer in Aramaic. Examiner for the Oriental
Languages Tripos and the Theological Tripos at Cambridge.

Isaac of Antioch.

O. J. R. H.
OSBERT JOHN RADCLIFFE HOWARTH, M.A.

Christ Church, Oxford. Geographical Scholar, 1901. Assistant
Secretary of the British Association.

Ireland: _Geography_.

P. A.
PAUL DANIEL ALPHANDÉRY.

Professor of the History of Dogma, École pratique des hautes
études, Sorbonne, Paris. Author of _Les Idées morales chez les
hétérodoxes latines au début du XIII^e. siècle_.

Inquisition.

P. A. K.
PRINCE PETER ALEXEIVITCH KROPOTKIN.

See the biographical article, KROPOTKIN, PRINCE P. A.

Irkutsk (_in part_).

P. C. M.
PETER CHALMERS MITCHELL, M.A., F.R.S., F.Z.S., D.SC., LL.D.

Secretary to the Zoological Society of London. University
Demonstrator in Comparative Anatomy and Assistant to Linacre
Professor at Oxford, 1888-1891. Examiner in Zoology to the
University of London, 1903. Author of _Outlines of Biology_; &c.

Hybridism.

P. Gi.
PETER GILES, M.A., LL.D., LITT.D.

Fellow and Classical Lecturer of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, and
University Reader in Comparative Philology. Formerly Secretary of
the Cambridge Philological Society. Author of _Manual of
Comparative Philology_; &c.

I;
Indo-European Languages.

P. Sm.
PRESERVED SMITH, PH.D.

Rufus B. Kellogg Fellow, Amherst College, Amherst, Mass.

Innocent I., II.

R.
THE RIGHT HON. LORD RAYLEIGH.

See the biographical article, RAYLEIGH, 3RD BARON.

Interference of Light.

R. A. S. M.
ROBERT ALEXANDER STEWART MACALISTER, M.A., F.S.A.

St John's College, Cambridge. Director of Excavations for the
Palestine Exploration Fund.

Idumaea.

R. Ba.
RICHARD BAGWELL, M.A., LL.D.

Commissioner of National Education for Ireland. Author of _Ireland
under the Tudors_; _Ireland under the Stuarts_.

Ireland: _Modern History_.

R. C. J.
SIR RICHARD CLAVERHOUSE JEBB, D.C.L., LL.D.

See the biographical article, JEBB, SIR RICHARD CLAVERHOUSE.

Isaeus;
Isocrates.

R. G.
RICHARD GARNETT. LL.D.

See the biographical article, GARNETT, RICHARD.

Irving, Washington.

R. H. C.
REV. ROBERT HENRY CHARLES, M.A., D.D., D.LITT.

Grinfield Lecturer, and Lecturer in Biblical Studies, Oxford.
Fellow of the British Academy. Formerly Professor of Biblical
Greek, Trinity College, Dublin. Author of _Critical History of the
Doctrine of a Future Life_; _Book of Jubilees_; &c.

Isaiah, Ascension of.

R. L.*
RICHARD LYDEKKER, F.R.S., F.Z.S., F.G.S.

Member of the Staff of the Geological Survey of India 1874-1882.
Author of _Catalogues of Fossil Mammals, Reptiles and Birds in the
British Museum_; _The Deer of all Lands_; &c.

Hyracoidea;
Ibex (_in part_);
Indri;
Insectivora.

R. P. S.
R. PHENÉ SPIERS, F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A.

Formerly Master of the Architectural School, Royal Academy,
London. Past President of Architectural Association. Associate and
Fellow of King's College, London. Corresponding Member of the
Institute of France. Editor of Fergusson's _History of
Architecture_. Author of _Architecture; East and West_; &c.

Hypaethros.

R. S. C.
ROBERT SEYMOUR CONWAY, M.A., D.LITT.(CANTAB.).

Professor of Latin and Indo-European Philology in the University
of Manchester. Formerly Professor of Latin in University College,
Cardiff; and Fellow of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge.
Author of _The Italic Dialects_.

Iguvium;
Iovilae.

S.
THE RIGHT HON. THE EARL OF SELBORNE.

See the biographical article, SELBORNE, 1ST EARL OF.

Hymns.

R. Tr.
ROLAND TRUSLOVE, M.A.

Formerly Scholar of Christ Church, Oxford. Dean, Fellow and
Lecturer in Classics at Worcester College, Oxford.

Indo-China, French (_in part_).

S. A. C.
STANLEY ARTHUR COOK, M.A.

Lecturer in Hebrew and Syriac, and formerly Fellow, Gonville and
Caius College, Cambridge. Editor for Palestine Exploration Fund.
Author of _Glossary of Aramaic Inscriptions_; _The Laws of Moses
and the Code of Hammurabi_; _Critical Notes on Old Testament
History_; _Religion of Ancient Palestine_; &c.

Ishmael.

S. Bl.
SIGFUS BLÖNDAL.

Librarian of the University of Copenhagen.

Iceland: _Recent Literature_.

T. As.
THOMAS ASHBY, M.A., D.LITT. (Oxon.).

Director of British School of Archaeology at Rome. Formerly
Scholar of Christ Church, Oxford. Craven Fellow, 1897. Conington
Prizeman, 1906. Member of the Imperial German Archaeological
Institute.

Interamna Lirenas;
Ischia.

T. A. I.
THOMAS ALLAN INGRAM, M.A., LL.D.

Trinity College, Dublin.

Illegitimacy;
Insurance (_in part_).

T. Ba.
SIR THOMAS BARCLAY, M.P.

Member of the Institute of International Law. Member of the
Supreme Council of the Congo Free State. Officer of the Legion of
Honour. Author of _Problems of International Practice and
Diplomacy_; &c. M.P. for Blackburn, 1910.

Immunity;
International Law.

T. F.
REV. THOMAS FOWLER, M.A., D.D., LL.D. (1832-1904).

President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, 1881-1904. Honorary
Fellow of Lincoln College. Professor of Logic, 1873-1888.
Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford, 1899-1901. Author of
_Elements of Deductive Logic_; _Elements of Inductive Logic_;
_Locke_ ("English Men of Letters"); _Shaftesbury and Hutcheson_
("English Philosophers"); &c.

Hutcheson, Francis (_in part_).

T. F. C.
THEODORE FREYLINGHUYSEN COLLIER, PH.D.

Assistant Professor of History, Williams College, Williamstown,
Mass., U.S.A.

Innocent IX.-XIII.

T. H. H.*
COLONEL SIR THOMAS HUNGERFORD HOLDICH, K.C.M.G., K.C.I.E.,
HON.D.SC.

Superintendent, Frontier Surveys, India, 1892-1898. Gold
Medallist, R.G.S., London, 1887. Author of _The Indian
Borderland_; _The Countries of the King's Award_; _India_;
_Tibet_; &c.

Indus.

T. K. C.
REV. THOMAS KELLY CHEYNE, D.D.

See the biographical article, CHEYNE, T. K.

Isaiah.

Th. T.
THORVALDUR THORODDSEN.

Icelandic Expert and Explorer. Honorary Professor in the
University of Copenhagen. Author of _History of Icelandic
Geography_; _Geological Map of Iceland_; &c.

Iceland: _Geography and Statistics_.

W. A. B. C.
REV. WILLIAM AUGUSTUS BREVOORT COOLIDGE, M.A., F.R.G.S.,
PH.D.(Bern).

Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. Professor of English History,
St David's College, Lampeter, 1880-1881. Author of _Guide du Haut
Dauphiné_; _The Range of the Tödi_; _Guide to Grindelwald_; _Guide
to Switzerland_; _The Alps in Nature and in History_; &c. Editor
of _The Alpine Journal_, 1880-1881; &c.

Hyères;
Innsbruck;
Interlaken;
Iseo, Lake of;
Isère (_River_);
Isère (_Department_).

W. A. P.
WALTER ALISON PHILLIPS, M.A.

Formerly Exhibitioner of Merton College and Senior Scholar of St
John's College, Oxford. Author of _Modern Europe_; &c.

Innocent III., IV.

W. C. U.
WILLIAM CAWTHORNE UNWIN, LL.D., F.R.S., M.INST.C.E., M.INST.M.E.,
A.R.I.B.A.

Emeritus Professor, Central Technical College, City and Guilds of
London Institute. Author of _Wrought Iron Bridges and Roofs_;
_Treatise on Hydraulics_; &c.

Hydraulics.

W. F. C.
WILLIAM FEILDEN CRAIES, M.A.

Barrister-at-Law, Inner Temple. Lecturer on Criminal Law, King's
College, London. Editor of Archbold's _Criminal Pleading_ (23rd
edition).

Indictment.

W. F. Sh.
WILLIAM FLEETWOOD SHEPPARD, M.A.

Senior Examiner in the Board of Education, London. Formerly Fellow
of Trinity College, Cambridge. Senior Wrangler, 1884.

Interpolation.

W. G.
WILLIAM GARNETT, M.A., D.C.L.

Educational Adviser to the London County Council. Formerly Fellow
and Lecturer of St John's College, Cambridge. Principal and
Professor of Mathematics, Durham College of Science,
Newcastle-on-Tyne. Author of _Elementary Dynamics_; &c.

Hydrometer.

W. Go.
WILLIAM GOW, M.A., PH.D.

Secretary of the British and Foreign Marine Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Liverpool. Lecturer on Marine Insurance at University College,
Liverpool. Author of _Marine Insurance_; &c.

Insurance: _Marine_.

W. H. F.
SIR WILLIAM HENRY FLOWER, F.R.S.

See the biographical article, FLOWER, SIR W. H.

Ibex (_in part_).

W. H. Po.
W. HALDANE PORTER.

Barrister-at-Law, Middle Temple.

Ireland: _Statistics and Administration_.

W. Ma.
SIR WILLIAM MARKBY, K.C.I.E.

See the biographical article, MARKBY, SIR WILLIAM.

Indian Law.

W. McD.
WILLIAM MCDOUGALL, M.A.

Wilde Reader in Mental Philosophy in the University of Oxford.
Formerly Fellow of St John's College, Cambridge.

Hypnotism.

W. M. L.
WALLACE MARTIN LINDSAY, M.A., LITT.D., LL.D.

Professor of Humanity, University of St Andrews. Fellow of the
British Academy. Formerly Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford. Author
of _Handbook of Latin Inscriptions_; _The Latin Language_; &c.

Inscriptions: _Latin_ (_in part_).

W. M. Ra.
SIR WILLIAM MITCHELL RAMSAY, LITT.D., D.C.L.

See the biographical article, RAMSAY, SIR W. MITCHELL.

Iconium.

W. R. So.
WILLIAM RITCHIE SORLEY, M.A., LITT.D., LL.D.

Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University of Cambridge.
Fellow of King's College, Cambridge. Fellow of the British
Academy. Formerly Fellow of Trinity College. Author of _The Ethics
of Naturalism_; _The Interpretation of Evolution_; &c.

Iamblichus.

W. T. T.-D.
SIR WILLIAM TURNER THISELTON-DYER, F.R.S., K.C.M.G., C.I.E.,
D.SC., LL.D., PH.D., F.L.S.

Hon. Student of Christ Church, Oxford. Director, Royal Botanic
Gardens, Kew, 1885-1905. Botanical Adviser to Secretary of State
for Colonies, 1902-1906. Joint-author of _Flora of Middlesex_.
Editor of _Flora Capenses_ and _Flora of Tropical Africa_.

Huxley.

W. Wn.
WILLIAM WATSON, D.SC., F.R.S., A.R.C.S.

Assistant Professor of Physics, Royal College of Science, London.
Vice-President of the Physical Society. Author of _A Text Book of
Practical Physics_; &c.

Inclinometer.

W. W. H.
SIR WILLIAM WILSON HUNTER.

See the biographical article. HUNTER, SIR WILLIAM WILSON.

India: _History (in part); Geography and Statistics (in part)._

PRINCIPAL UNSIGNED ARTICLES

Husband and Wife. Image. Ink.
Hyacinth. Impeachment. Inkerman.
Hyderabad. Income Tax. International, The.
Hydrogen. Indiana. Intestacy.
Hydropathy. Indian Mutiny. Inverness-shire.
Hydrophobia. Indicator. Investiture.
Ice. Infant. Iodine.
Ice-Yachting. Infanticide. Iowa.
Idaho. Infinite. Ipecacuanha.
Illinois. Influenza. Iris.
Illumination. Inheritance. Iron.
Illyria. Injunction. Irrigation.

FOOTNOTE:

[1] A complete list, showing all individual contributors, appears in
the final volume.

ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA

ELEVENTH EDITION

VOLUME XIV

HUSBAND, properly the "head of a household," but now chiefly used in the sense of a man legally joined by marriage to a woman, his "wife"; the legal relations between them are treated below under HUSBAND AND WIFE. The word appears in O. Eng. as _húsbonda_, answering to the Old Norwegian _húsbóndi_, and means the owner or freeholder of a _hus_, or house. The last part of the word still survives in "bondage" and "bondman," and is derived from _bua_, to dwell, which, like Lat. _colere_, means also to till or cultivate, and to have a household. "Wife," in O. Eng. _wif_, appears in all Teutonic languages except Gothic; cf. Ger. _Weib_, Dutch _wijf_, &c., and meant originally simply a female, "woman" itself being derived from _wifman_, the pronunciation of the plural _wimmen_ still preserving the original _i_. Many derivations of "wife" have been given; thus it has been connected with the root of "weave," with the Gothic _waibjan_, to fold or wrap up, referring to the entangling clothes worn by a woman, and also with the root of _vibrare_, to tremble. These are all merely guesses, and the ultimate history of the word is lost. It does not appear outside Teutonic languages. Parallel to "husband" is "housewife," the woman managing a household. The earlier _húswif_ was pronounced _hussif_, and this pronunciation survives in the application of the word to a small case containing scissors, needles and pins, cottons, &c. From this form also derives "hussy," now only used in a depreciatory sense of a light, impertinent girl. Beyond the meaning of a husband as a married man, the word appears in connexion with agriculture, in "husbandry" and "husbandman." According to some authorities "husbandman" meant originally in the north of England a holder of a "husbandland," a manorial tenant who held two ox-gangs or virgates, and ranked next below the yeoman (see J. C. Atkinson in _Notes and Queries_, 6th series, vol. xii., and E. Bateson, _History of Northumberland_, ii., 1893). From the idea of the manager of a household, "husband" was in use transferred to the manager of an estate, and the title was held by certain officials, especially in the great trading companies. Thus the "husband" of the East India Company looked after the interests of the company at the custom-house. The word in this sense is practically obsolete, but it still appears in "ship's husband," an agent of the owners of a ship who looks to the proper equipping of the vessel, and her repairs, procures and adjusts freights, keeps the accounts, makes charter-parties and acts generally as manager of the ship's employment. Where such an agent is himself one of the owners of the vessel, the name of "managing owner" is used. The "ship's husband" or "managing owner" must register his name and address at the port of registry (Merchant Shipping Act 1894, § 59). From the use of "husband" for a good and thrifty manager of a household, the verb "to husband" means to economize, to lay up a store, to save.

HUSBAND AND WIFE, LAW RELATING TO. For the modes in which the relation of husband and wife may be constituted and dissolved, see MARRIAGE and DIVORCE. The present article will deal only with the effect of marriage on the legal position of the spouses. The person chiefly affected is the wife, who probably in all political systems becomes subject, in consequence of marriage, to some kind of disability. The most favourable system scarcely leaves her as free as an unmarried woman; and the most unfavourable subjects her absolutely to the authority of her husband. In modern times the effect of marriage on property is perhaps the most important of its consequences, and on this point the laws of different states show wide diversity of principles.

The history of Roman law exhibits a transition from an extreme theory to its opposite. The position of the wife in the earliest Roman household was regulated by the law of _Manus_. She fell under the "hand" of her husband,--became one of his family, along with his sons and daughters, natural or adopted, and his slaves. The dominion which, so far as the children was concerned, was known as the _patria potestas_, was, with reference to the wife, called the _manus_. The subject members of the family, whether wife or children, had, broadly speaking, no rights of their own. If this institution implied the complete subjection of the wife to the husband, it also implied a much closer bond of union between them than we find in the later Roman law. The wife on her husband's death succeeded, like the children, to freedom and a share of the inheritance. _Manus_, however, was not essential to a legal marriage; its restraints were irksome and unpopular, and in course of time it ceased to exist, leaving no equivalent protection of the stability of family life. The later Roman marriage left the spouses comparatively independent of each other. The distance between the two modes of marriage may be estimated by the fact that, while under the former the wife was one of the husband's immediate heirs, under the latter she was called to the inheritance only after his kith and kin had been exhausted, and only in preference to the treasury. It seems doubtful how far she had, during the continuance of marriage, a legal right to enforce aliment from her husband, although if he neglected her she had the unsatisfactory remedy of an easy divorce. The law, in fact, preferred to leave the parties to arrange their mutual rights and obligations by private contracts. Hence the importance of the law of settlements (_Dotes_). The _Dos_ and the _Donatio ante nuptias_ were settlements by or on behalf of the husband or wife, during the continuance of the marriage, and the law seems to have looked with some jealousy on gifts made by one to the other in any less formal way, as possibly tainted with undue influence. During the marriage the husband had the administration of the property.

The _manus_ of the Roman law appears to be only one instance of an institution common to all primitive societies. On the continent of Europe after many centuries, during which local usages were brought under the influence of principles derived from the Roman law, a theory of marriage became established, the leading feature of which is the _community of goods_ between husband and wife. Describing the principle as it prevails in France, Story (_Conflict of Laws_, § 130) says: "This community or nuptial partnership (in the absence of any special contract) generally extends to all the movable property of the husband and wife, and to the fruits, income and revenue thereof.... It extends also to all immovable property of the husband and wife acquired during the marriage, but not to such immovable property as either possessed at the time of the marriage, or which came to them afterwards by title of succession or by gift. The property thus acquired by this nuptial partnership is liable to the debts of the parties existing at the time of the marriage; to the debts contracted by the husband during the community, or by the wife during the community with the consent of the husband; and to debts contracted for the maintenance of the family.... The husband alone is entitled to administer the property of the community, and he may alien, sell or mortgage it without the concurrence of the wife." But he cannot dispose by will of more than his share of the common property, nor can he part with it gratuitously _inter vivos_. The community is dissolved by death (natural or civil), divorce, separation of body or separation of property. On separation of body or of property the wife is entitled to the full control of her movable property, but cannot alien her immovable property, without her husband's consent or legal authority. On the death of either party the property is divided in equal moieties between the survivor and the heirs of the deceased.

_Law of England._--The English common law as usual followed its own course in dealing with this subject, and in no department were its rules more entirely insular and independent. The text writers all assumed two fundamental principles, which between them established a system of rights totally unlike that just described. Husband and wife were said to be one person in the eye of the law--_unica persona, quia caro una et sanguis unus_. Hence a man could not grant or give anything to his wife, because she was himself, and if there were any compacts between them before marriage they were dissolved by the union of persons. Hence, too, the old rule of law, now greatly modified, that husband and wife could not be allowed to give evidence against each other, in any trial, civil or criminal. The unity, however, was one-sided only; it was the wife who was merged in the husband, not the husband in the wife. And when the theory did not apply, the disabilities of "coverture" suspended the active exercise of the wife's legal faculties. The old technical phraseology described husband and wife as _baron_ and _feme_; the rights of the husband were baronial rights. From one point of view the wife was merged in the husband, from another she was as one of his vassals. A curious example is the immunity of the wife in certain cases from punishment for crime committed in the presence and on the presumed coercion of the husband. "So great a favourite," says Blackstone, "is the female sex of the laws of England."

The application of these principles with reference to the property of the wife, and her capacity to contract, may now be briefly traced.

The _freehold property_ of the wife became vested in the husband and herself during the coverture, and he had the management and the profits. If the wife had been in actual possession at any time during the marriage of an estate of inheritance, and if there had been a child of the marriage capable of inheriting, then the husband became entitled on his wife's death to hold the estate for his own life as tenant by the _curtesy of England_ (_curialitas_).[1] Beyond this, however, the husband's rights did not extend, and the wife's heir at last succeeded to the inheritance. The wife could not part with her real estate without the concurrence of the husband; and even so she must be examined apart from her husband, to ascertain whether she freely and voluntarily consented to the deed.

With regard to personal property, it passed absolutely at common law to the husband. Specific things in the possession of the wife (_choses_ in possession) became the property of the husband at once; things not in possession, but due and recoverable from others (_choses_ in action), might be recovered by the husband. A _chose_ in action not reduced into actual possession, when the marriage was dissolved by death, reverted to the wife if she was the survivor; if the husband survived he could obtain possession by taking out letters of administration. A _chose_ in action was to be distinguished from a specific thing which, although the property of the wife, was for the time being in the hands of another. In the latter case the property was in the wife, and passed at once to the husband; in the former the wife had a mere _jus in personam_, which the husband might enforce if he chose, but which was still capable of reverting to the wife if the husband died without enforcing it.

The _chattels real_ of the wife (i.e., personal property, dependent on, and partaking of, the nature of realty, such as leaseholds) passed to the husband, subject to the wife's right of survivorship, unless barred by the husband by some act done during his life. A disposition by will did not bar the wife's interest; but any disposition _inter vivos_ by the husband was valid and effective.

The courts of equity, however, greatly modified the rules of the common law by the introduction of the wife's _separate estate_, i.e. property settled to the wife for her separate use, independently of her husband. The principle seems to have been originally admitted in a case of actual separation, when a fund was given for the maintenance of the wife while living apart from her husband. And the conditions under which separate estate might be enjoyed had taken the Court of Chancery many generations to develop. No particular form of words was necessary to create a separate estate, and the intervention of trustees, though common, was not necessary. A clear intention to deprive the husband of his common law rights was sufficient to do so. In such a case a married woman was entitled to deal with her property as if she was unmarried, although the earlier decisions were in favour of requiring her binding engagements to be in writing or under seal. But it was afterwards held that any engagements, clearly made with reference to the separate estate, would bind that estate, exactly as if the woman had been a _feme sole_. Connected with the doctrine of separate use was the equitable contrivance of _restraint on anticipation_ with which later legislation has not interfered, whereby property might be so settled to the separate use of a married woman that she could not, during coverture, alienate it or anticipate the income. No such restraint is recognized in the ease of a man or of a _feme sole_, and it depends entirely on the separate estate; and the separate estate has its existence only during coverture, so that a woman to whom such an estate is given may dispose of it so long as she is unmarried, but becomes bound by the restraint as soon as she is married. In yet another way the court of Chancery interfered to protect the interests of married women. When a husband sought the aid of that court to get possession of his wife's _choses_ in action, he was required to make a provision for her and her children out of the fund sought to be recovered. This is called the wife's _equity to a settlement_, and is said to be based on the original maxim of Chancery jurisprudence, that "he who seeks equity must do equity." Two other property interests of minor importance are recognised. The wife's _pin-money_ is a provision for the purchase of clothes and ornaments suitable to her husband's station, but it is not an absolute gift to the separate use of the wife; and a wife surviving her husband cannot claim for more than one year's arrears of pin-money. _Paraphernalia_ are jewels and other ornaments given to the wife by her husband for the purpose of being worn by her, but not as her separate property. The husband may dispose of them by act _inter vivos_ but not by will, unless the will confers other benefits on the wife, in which case she must elect between the will and the paraphernalia. She may also on the death of the husband claim paraphernalia, provided all creditors have been satisfied, her right being superior to that of any legatee.

The corresponding interest of the wife in the property of the husband is much more meagre and illusory. Besides a general right to maintenance at her husband's expense, she has at common law a right to dower (q.v.) in her husband's lands, and to a _pars rationabilis_ (third) of his personal estate, if he dies intestate. The former, which originally was a solid provision for widows, has by the ingenuity of conveyancers, as well as by positive enactment, been reduced to very slender dimensions. It may be destroyed by a mere declaration to that effect on the part of the husband, as well as by his conveyance of the land or by his will.

The common practice of regulating the rights of husband, wife and children by marriage settlements obviates the hardships of the common law--at least for the women of the wealthier classes. The legislature by the Married Women's Property Acts of 1870, 1874, 1882 (which repealed and consolidated the acts of 1870 and 1874), 1893 and 1907 introduced very considerable changes. The chief provisions of the Married Women's Property Act 1882, which enormously improved the position of women unprotected by marriage settlement, are, shortly, that a married woman is capable of acquiring, holding and disposing of by will or otherwise, any real and personal property, in the same manner as if she were a _feme sole_, without the intervention of any trustee. The property of a woman married after the beginning of the act, whether belonging to her at the time of marriage or acquired after marriage, is held by her as a _feme sole_. The same is the case with property acquired after the beginning of the act by a woman married before the act. After marriage a woman remains liable for antenuptial debts and liabilities, and as between her and her husband, in the absence of contract to the contrary, her separate property is deemed primarily liable. The husband is only liable to the extent of property acquired from or through his wife. The act also contained provisions as to stock, investment, insurance, evidence and other matters. The effect of the act was to render obsolete the law as to what created a separate use or a reduction into possession of _choses_ in action, as to equity to a settlement, as to fraud on the husband's marital rights, and as to the inability of one of two married persons to give a gift to the other. Also, in the case of a gift to a husband and wife in terms which would make them joint tenants if unmarried, they no longer take as one person but as two. The act contained a special saving of existing and future settlements; a settlement being still necessary where it is desired to secure only the enjoyment of the income to the wife and to provide for children. The act by itself would enable the wife, without regard to family claims, instantly to part with the whole of any property which might come to her. Restraint on anticipation was preserved by the act, subject to the liability of such property for antenuptial debts, and to the power given by the Conveyancing Act 1881 to bind a married woman's interest notwithstanding a clause of restraint. The Married Women's Property Act of 1893 repealed two clauses in the act of 1882, the exact bearing of which had been a matter of controversy. It provided specifically that every contract thereinafter entered into by a married woman, otherwise than as an agent, should be deemed to be a contract entered into by her with respect to and be binding upon her separate property, whether she was or was not in fact possessed of or entitled to any separate property at the time when she entered into such contract, that it should bind all separate property which she might at any time or thereafter be possessed of or entitled to, and that it should be enforceable by process of law against all property which she might thereafter, while discovert, be possessed of or entitled to. The act of 1907 enabled a married woman, without her husband, to dispose of or join in disposing of, real or personal property held by her solely or jointly as trustee or personal representative, in like manner as if she were a _feme sole_. It also provided that a settlement or agreement for settlement whether before or after marriage, respecting the property of the woman, should not be valid unless executed by her if she was of full age or confirmed by her after she attained full age. The Married Women's Property Act 1908 removed a curious anomaly by enacting that a married woman having separate property should be equally liable with single women and widows for the maintenance of parents who are in receipt of poor relief.

The British colonies generally have adopted the principles of the English acts of 1882 and 1893.

_Law of Scotland._--The law of Scotland differs less from English law
than the use of a very different terminology would lead us to suppose.
The phrase _communio bonorum_ has been employed to express the
interest which the spouses have in the _movable_ property of both, but
its use has been severely censured as essentially inaccurate and
misleading. It has been contended that there was no real community of
goods, and no partnership or societas between the spouses. The wife's
movable property, with certain exceptions, and subject to special
agreements, became as absolutely the property of the husband as it did
in English law. The notion of a _communio_ was, however, favoured by
the peculiar rights of the wife and children on the dissolution of the
marriage. Previous to the Intestate Movable Succession (Scotland) Act
1855 the law stood as follows. The fund formed by the movable property
of both spouses may be dealt with by the husband as he pleases during
life; it is increased by his acquisitions and diminished by his debts.
The respective shares contributed by husband and wife return on the
dissolution of the marriage to them or their representatives if the
marriage be dissolved within a year and a day, and without a living
child. Otherwise the division is into two or three shares, according
as children are existing or not at the dissolution of the marriage. On
the death of the husband, his children take one-third (called
_legitim_), the widow takes one-third (_jus relictae_), and the
remaining one-third (the _dead part_) goes according to his will or to
his next of kin. If there be no children, the _jus relictae_ and the
dead's part are each one-half. If the wife die before the husband, her
representatives, whether children or not, are creditors for the value
of her share. The statute above-mentioned, however, enacts that "where
a wife shall predecease her husband, the next of kin, executors or
other representatives of such wife, whether testate or intestate,
shall have no right to any share of the goods in communion; nor shall
any legacy or bequest or testamentary disposition thereof by such
wife, affect or attach to the said goods or any portion thereof." It
also abolishes the rule by which the shares revert if the marriage
does not subsist for a year and a day. Several later acts apply to
Scotland some of the principles of the English Married Women's
Property Acts. These are the Married Women's Property (Scotland) Act
1877, which protects the earnings, &c., of wives, and limits the
husband's liability for antenuptial debts of the wife, the Married
Women's Policies of Assurance (Scotland) Act 1880, which enables a
woman to contract for a policy of assurance for her separate use, and
the Married Women's Property (Scotland) Act 1881, which abolished the
_jus mariti_.

A wife's _heritable_ property does not pass to the husband on
marriage, but he acquires a right to the administration and profits.
His courtesy, as in English law, is also recognized. On the other
hand, a widow has a _terce_ or life-rent of a third part of the
husband's heritable estate, unless she has accepted a conventional
provision.

_Continental Europe._--Since 1882 English legislation in the matter of
married women's property has progressed from perhaps the most backward
to the foremost place in Europe. By a curious contrast, the only two
European countries where, in the absence of a settlement to the
contrary, independence of the wife's property was recognized, were
Russia and Italy. But there is now a marked tendency towards
contractual emancipation. Sweden adopted a law on this subject in
1874, Denmark in 1880, Norway in 1888. Germany followed, the Civil
Code which came into operation in 1900 (Art. 1367) providing that the
wife's wages or earnings shall form part of her _Vorbehaltsgut_ or
separate property, which a previous article (1365) placed beyond
the husband's control. As regards property accruing to the wife in
Germany by succession, will or gift _inter vivos_, it is only separate
property where the donor has deliberately stipulated exclusion of the
husband's right.

In France it seemed as if the system of community of property was
ingrained in the institutions of the country. But a law of 1907 has
brought France into line with other countries. This law gives a
married woman sole control over earnings from her personal work and
savings therefrom. She can with such money acquire personalty or
realty, over the former of which she has absolute control. But if she
abuses her rights by squandering her money or administering her
property badly or imprudently the husband may apply to the court to
have her freedom restricted.

_American Law._--In the United States, the revolt against the common
law theory of husband and wife was carried farther than in England,
and legislation early tended in the direction of absolute equality
between the sexes. Each state has, however, taken its own way and
selected its own time for introducing modifications of the existing
law, so that the legislation on this subject is now exceedingly
complicated and difficult. James Schouler (_Law of Domestic
Relations_) gives an account of the general result in the different
states to which reference may be made. The peculiar system of
Homestead Laws in many of the states (see HOMESTEAD and EXEMPTION
LAWS) constitutes an inalienable provision for the wife and family of
the householder.

FOOTNOTE:

[1] Curtesy or courtesy has been explained by legal writers as
"arising _by favour_ of the law of England." The word has nothing to
do with courtesy in the sense of complaisance.

HUSHI (Rumanian _Husi_), the capital of the department of Falciu, Rumania; on a branch of the Jassy-Galatz railway, 9 m. W. of the river Pruth and the Russian frontier. Pop. (1900) 15,404, about one-fourth being Jews. Hushi is an episcopal see. The cathedral was built in 1491 by Stephen the Great of Moldavia. There are no important manufactures, but a large fair is held annually in September for the sale of live-stock, and wine is produced in considerable quantities. Hushi is said to have been founded in the 15th century by a colony of Hussites, from whom its name is derived. The treaty of the Pruth between Russia and Turkey was signed here in 1711.

HUSKISSON, WILLIAM (1770-1830), English statesman and financier, was descended from an old Staffordshire family of moderate fortune, and was born at Birch Moreton, Worcestershire, on the 11th of March 1770. Having been placed in his fourteenth year under the charge of his maternal great-uncle Dr Gem, physician to the English embassy at Paris, in 1783 he passed his early years amidst a political fermentation which led him to take a deep interest in politics. Though he approved of the French Revolution, his sympathies were with the more moderate party, and he became a member of the "club of 1789," instituted to support the new form of constitutional monarchy in opposition to the anarchical attempts of the Jacobins. He early displayed his mastery of the principles of finance by a _Discours_ delivered in August 1790 before this society, in regard to the issue of assignats by the government. The _Discours_ gained him considerable reputation, but as it failed in its purpose he withdrew from the society. In January 1793 he was appointed by Dundas to an office created to direct the execution of the Aliens Act; and in the discharge of his delicate duties he manifested such ability that in 1795 he was appointed under-secretary at war. In the following year he entered parliament as member for Morpeth, but for a considerable period he took scarcely any part in the debates. In 1800 he inherited a fortune from Dr Gem. On the retirement of Pitt in 1801 he resigned office, and after contesting Dover unsuccessfully he withdrew for a time into private life. Having in 1804 been chosen to represent Liskeard, he was on the restoration of the Pitt ministry appointed secretary of the treasury, holding office till the dissolution of the ministry after the death of Pitt in January 1806. After being elected for Harwich in 1807, he accepted the same office under the duke of Portland, but he withdrew from the ministry along with Canning in 1809. In the following year he published a pamphlet on the currency system, which confirmed his reputation as the ablest financier of his time; but his free-trade principles did not accord with those of his party. In 1812 he was returned for Chichester. When in 1814 he re-entered the public service, it was only as chief commissioner of woods and forests, but his influence was from this time very great in the commercial and financial legislation of the country. He took a prominent part in the corn-law debates of 1814 and 1815; and in 1819 he presented a memorandum to Lord Liverpool advocating a large reduction in the unfunded debt, and explaining a method for the resumption of cash payments, which was embodied in the act passed the same year. In 1821 he was a member of the committee appointed to inquire into the causes of the agricultural distress then prevailing, and the proposed relaxation of the corn laws embodied in the report was understood to have been chiefly due to his strenuous advocacy. In 1823 he was appointed president of the board of trade and treasurer of the navy, and shortly afterwards he received a seat in the cabinet. In the same year he was returned for Liverpool as successor to Canning, and as the only man who could reconcile the Tory merchants to a free trade policy. Among the more important legislative changes with which he was principally connected were a reform of the Navigation Acts, admitting other nations to a full equality and reciprocity of shipping duties; the repeal of the labour laws; the introduction of a new sinking fund; the reduction of the duties on manufactures and on the importation of foreign goods, and the repeal of the quarantine duties. In accordance with his suggestion Canning in 1827 introduced a measure on the corn laws proposing the adoption of a sliding scale to regulate the amount of duty. A misapprehension between Huskisson and the duke of Wellington led to the duke proposing an amendment, the success of which caused the abandonment of the measure by the government. After the death of Canning in the same year Huskisson accepted the secretaryship of the colonies under Lord Goderich, an office which he continued to hold in the new cabinet formed by the duke of Wellington in the following year. After succeeding with great difficulty in inducing the cabinet to agree to a compromise on the corn laws, Huskisson finally resigned office in May 1829 on account of a difference with his colleagues in regard to the disfranchisement of East Retford. On the 15th of September of the following year he was accidentally killed by a locomotive engine while present at the opening of the Liverpool and Manchester railway.

See the _Life of Huskisson_, by J. Wright (London, 1831).

HUSS (or HUS), JOHN (c. 1373-1415), Bohemian reformer and martyr, was born at Hussinecz,[1] a market village at the foot of the Böhmerwald, and not far from the Bavarian frontier, between 1373 and 1375, the exact date being uncertain. His parents appear to have been well-to-do Czechs of the peasant class. Of his early life nothing is recorded except that, notwithstanding the early loss of his father, he obtained a good elementary education, first at Hussinecz, and afterwards at the neighbouring town of Prachaticz. At, or only a very little beyond, the usual age he entered the recently (1348) founded university of Prague, where he became bachelor of arts in 1393, bachelor of theology in 1394, and master of arts in 1396. In 1398 he was chosen by the Bohemian "nation" of the university to an examinership for the bachelor's degree; in the same year he began to lecture also, and there is reason to believe that the philosophical writings of Wycliffe, with which he had been for some years acquainted, were his text-books. In October 1401 he was made dean of the philosophical faculty, and for the half-yearly period from October 1402 to April 1403 he held the office of rector of the university. In 1402 also he was made rector or curate (_capellarius_) of the Bethlehem chapel, which had in 1391 been erected and endowed by some zealous citizens of Prague for the purpose of providing good popular preaching in the Bohemian tongue. This appointment had a deep influence on the already vigorous religious life of Huss himself; and one of the effects of the earnest and independent study of Scripture into which it led him was a profound conviction of the great value not only of the philosophical but also of the theological writings of Wycliffe.

This newly-formed sympathy with the English reformer did not, in the first instance at least, involve Huss in any conscious opposition to the established doctrines of Catholicism, or in any direct conflict with the authorities of the church; and for several years he continued to act in full accord with his archbishop (Sbynjek, or Sbynko, of Hasenburg). Thus in 1405 he, with other two masters, was commissioned to examine into certain reputed miracles at Wilsnack, near Wittenberg, which had caused that church to be made a resort of pilgrims from all parts of Europe. The result of their report was that all pilgrimage thither from the province of Bohemia was prohibited by the archbishop on pain of excommunication, while Huss, with the full sanction of his superior, gave to the world his first published writing, entitled _De Omni Sanguine Christi Glorificato_, in which he declaimed in no measured terms against forged miracles and ecclesiastical greed, urging Christians at the same time to desist from looking for sensible signs of Christ's presence, but rather to seek Him in His enduring word. More than once also Huss, together with his friend Stanislaus of Znaim, was appointed to be synod preacher, and in this capacity he delivered at the provincial councils of Bohemia many faithful admonitions. As early as the 28th of May 1403, it is true, there had been held a university disputation about the new doctrines of Wycliffe, which had resulted in the condemnation of certain propositions presumed to be his; five years later (May 20, 1408) this decision had been refined into a declaration that these, forty-five in number, were not to be taught in any heretical, erroneous or offensive sense. But it was only slowly that the growing sympathy of Huss with Wycliffe unfavourably affected his relations with his colleagues in the priesthood. In 1408, however, the clergy of the city and archiepiscopal diocese of Prague laid before the archbishop a formal complaint against Huss, arising out of strong expressions with regard to clerical abuses of which he had made use in his public discourses; and the result was that, having been first deprived of his appointment as synodal preacher, he was, after a vain attempt to defend himself in writing, publicly forbidden the exercise of any priestly function throughout the diocese. Simultaneously with these proceedings in Bohemia, negotiations had been going on for the removal of the long-continued papal schism, and it had become apparent that a satisfactory solution could only be secured if, as seemed not impossible, the supporters of the rival popes, Benedict XIII. and Gregory XII., could be induced, in view of the approaching council of Pisa, to pledge themselves to a strict neutrality. With this end King Wenceslaus of Bohemia had requested the co-operation of the archbishop and his clergy, and also the support of the university, in both instances unsuccessfully, although in the case of the latter the Bohemian "nation," with Huss at its head, had only been overborne by the votes of the Bavarians, Saxons and Poles. There followed an expression of nationalist and particularistic as opposed to ultramontane and also to German feeling, which undoubtedly was of supreme importance for the whole of the subsequent career of Huss. In compliance with this feeling a royal edict (January 18, 1409) was issued, by which, in alleged conformity with Paris usage, and with the original charter of the university, the Bohemian "nation" received three votes, while only one was allotted to the other three "nations" combined; whereupon all the foreigners, to the number of several thousands, almost immediately withdrew from Prague, an occurrence which led to the formation shortly afterwards of the university of Leipzig.

It was a dangerous triumph for Huss; for his popularity at court and in the general community had been secured only at the price of clerical antipathy everywhere and of much German ill-will. Among the first results of the changed order of things were on the one hand the election of Huss (October 1409) to be again rector of the university, but on the other hand the appointment by the archbishop of an inquisitor to inquire into charges of heretical teaching and inflammatory preaching brought against him. He had spoken disrespectfully of the church, it was said, had even hinted that Antichrist might be found to be in Rome, had fomented in his preaching the quarrel between Bohemians and Germans, and had, notwithstanding all that had passed, continued to speak of Wycliffe as both a pious man and an orthodox teacher. The direct result of this investigation is not known, but it is impossible to disconnect from it the promulgation by Pope Alexander V., on the 20th of December 1409, of a bull which ordered the abjuration of all Wycliffite heresies and the surrender of all his books, while at the same time--a measure specially levelled at the pulpit of Bethlehem chapel--all preaching was prohibited except in localities which had been by long usage set apart for that use. This decree, as soon as it was published in Prague (March 9, 1410), led to much popular agitation, and provoked an appeal by Huss to the pope's better informed judgment; the archbishop, however, resolutely insisted on carrying out his instructions, and in the following July caused to be publicly burned, in the courtyard of his own palace, upwards of 200 volumes of the writings of Wycliffe, while he pronounced solemn sentence of excommunication against Huss and certain of his friends, who had in the meantime again protested and appealed to the new pope (John XXIII.). Again the populace rose on behalf of their hero, who, in his turn, strong in the conscientious conviction that "in the things which pertain to salvation God is to be obeyed rather than man," continued uninterruptedly to preach in the Bethlehem chapel, and in the university began publicly to defend the so-called heretical treatises of Wycliffe, while from king and queen, nobles and burghers, a petition was sent to Rome praying that the condemnation and prohibition in the bull of Alexander V. might be quashed. Negotiations were carried on for some months, but in vain; in March 1411 the ban was anew pronounced upon Huss as a disobedient son of the church, while the magistrates and councillors of Prague who had favoured him were threatened with a similar penalty in ease of their giving him a contumacious support. Ultimately the whole city, which continued to harbour him, was laid under interdict; yet he went on preaching, and masses were celebrated as usual, so that at the date of Archbishop Sbynko's death in September 1411, it seemed as if the efforts of ecclesiastical authority had resulted in absolute failure.

The struggle, however, entered on a new phase with the appearance at Prague in May 1412 of the papal emissary charged with the proclamation of the papal bulls by which a religious war was decreed against the excommunicated King Ladislaus of Naples, and indulgence was promised to all who should take part in it, on terms similar to those which had been enjoyed by the earlier crusaders to the Holy Land. By his bold and thorough-going opposition to this mode of procedure against Ladislaus, and still more by his doctrine that indulgence could never be sold without simony, and could not be lawfully granted by the church except on condition of genuine contrition and repentance, Huss at last isolated himself, not only from the archiepiscopal party under Albik of Unitschow, but also from the theological faculty of the university, and especially from such men as Stanislaus of Znaim and Stephen Paletz, who until then had been his chief supporters. A popular demonstration, in which the papal bulls had been paraded through the streets with circumstances of peculiar ignominy and finally burnt, led to intervention by Wenceslaus on behalf of public order; three young men, for having openly asserted the unlawfulness of the papal indulgence after silence had been enjoined, were sentenced to death (June 1412); the excommunication against Huss was renewed, and the interdict again laid on all places which should give him shelter--a measure which now began to be more strictly regarded by the clergy, so that in the following December Huss had no alternative but to yield to the express wish of the king by temporarily withdrawing from Prague. A provincial synod, held at the instance of Wenceslaus in February 1413, broke up without having reached any practical result; and a commission appointed shortly afterwards also failed to bring about a reconciliation between Huss and his adversaries. The so-called heretic meanwhile spent his time partly at Kozihradek, some 45 m. south of Prague, and partly at Krakowitz in the immediate neighbourhood of the capital, occasionally giving a course of open-air preaching, but finding his chief employment in maintaining that copious correspondence of which some precious fragments still are extant, and in the composition of the treatise, _De Ecclesia_, which subsequently furnished most of the material for the capital charges brought against him, and was formerly considered the most important of his works, though it is mainly a transcript of Wycliffe's work of the same name.