Chapter VI: The Language as Recorded (9)

The extravagant expenditure of the late monarch had plunged the kingdom into apparently inextricable financial confusion. The debt was 3000 million livres, the estimated annual expenditure, exclusive of interest payments, 148 million livres, and the income about the same. The advisability of declaring a national bankruptcy was seriously discussed, and though this plan was rejected, measures hardly less violent were carried. By a _visa_, or examination of the state liabilities by a committee with full powers of quashing claims, the debt was reduced nearly a half, the coin in circulation was ordered to be called in and reissued at the rate of 120 for 100--a measure by which foreign coiners profited greatly, and a chamber of justice was established to punish speculators, to whom the difficulties of the state were ascribed. These measures had so little success that the _billets d'état_ which were issued as part security for the new debt at once sank 75% below their nominal value. At this crisis Law unfolded a vast scheme to the perplexed regent. A royal bank was to manage the trade and currency of the kingdom, to collect the taxes, and to free the country from debt. The council of finance, then under the duc de Noailles, opposed the plan, but the regent allowed Law to take some tentative steps. By an edict of 2nd May 1716, a private institution called _La Banque générale_, and managed by Law, was founded. The capital was 6 million livres, divided into 1200 shares of 5000 livres, payable in four instalments, one-fourth in cash, three-fourths in _billets d'état_. It was to perform the ordinary functions of a bank, and had power to issue notes payable at sight in the weight and value of the money mentioned at day of issue. The bank was a great and immediate success. By providing for the absorption of part of the state paper it raised the credit of the government. The notes were a most desirable medium of exchange, for they had the element of fixity of value, which, owing to the arbitrary mint decrees of the government, was wanting in the coin of the realm. They proved the most convenient instruments of remittance between the capital and the provinces, and they thus developed the industries of the latter. The rate of interest, previously enormous and uncertain, fell first to 6 and then to 4%; and when another decree (10th April 1717) ordered collectors of taxes to receive notes as payments, and to change them for coin at request, the bank so rose in favour that it soon had a note-issue of 60 million livres. Law now gained the full confidence of the regent, and was allowed to proceed with the development of the "system."

The trade of the region about the Mississippi had been granted to a speculator named Crozat. He found the undertaking too large, and was glad to give it up. By a decree of August 1717 Law was allowed to establish the _Compagnie de la Louisiane ou d'Occident_, and to endow it with privileges practically amounting to sovereignty over the most fertile region of North America. The capital was 100 million livres divided into 200,000 shares of 500 livres. The payments were to be one-fourth in coin and three-fourths in _billets d'état_. On these last the government was to pay 3 million livres interest yearly to the company. As the state paper was depreciated the shares fell much below par. The rapid rise of Law had made him many enemies, and they took advantage of this to attack the system. D'Argenson, now head of the council of finance, with the brothers Paris of Grenoble, famous tax farmers of the day, formed what was called the "anti-system." The farming of the taxes was let to them, under an assumed name, for 48½ million livres yearly. A company was formed, the exact counterpart of the Mississippi company. The capital was the same, divided in the same manner, but the payments were to be entirely in money. The returns from the public revenue were sure; those from the Mississippi scheme were not. Hence the shares of the latter were for some time out of favour. Law proceeded unmoved with the development of his plans. On the 4th of December 1718 the bank became a government institution under the name of _La Banque royale_. Law was director, and the king guaranteed the notes. The shareholders were repaid in coin, and, to widen the influence of the new institution, the transport of money between towns where it had branches was forbidden. The paper-issue now reached 110 millions. Law had such confidence in the success of his plans that he agreed to take over shares in the Mississippi company at par at a near date. The shares began rapidly to rise. The next move was to unite the companies _Des Indes Orientales_ and _De Chine_, founded in 1664 and 1713 respectively, but now dwindled away to a shadow, to his company. The united association, _La Compagnie des Indes_, had a practical monopoly of the foreign trade of France. These proceedings necessitated the creation of new capital to the nominal amount of 25 million livres. The payment was spread over 20 months. Every holder of four original shares (_mères_) could purchase one of the new shares (_filles_) at a premium of 50 livres. All these 500-livre shares rapidly rose to 750, or 50% above par. Law now turned his attention to obtaining additional powers within France itself. On the 25th of July 1719 an edict was issued granting the company for nine years the management of the mint and the coin-issue. For this privilege the company paid 5 million livres, and the money was raised by a new issue of shares of the nominal value of 500 livres, but with a premium of other 500. The list was only open for twenty days, and it was necessary to present four _mères_ and one _fille_ in order to obtain one of the new shares (_petites filles_). At the same time two dividends per annum of 6% each were promised. Again there was an attempt to ruin the bank by the commonplace expedient of making a run on it for coin; but the conspirators had to meet absolute power managed with fearlessness and skill. An edict appeared reducing, at a given date, the value of money, and those who had withdrawn coin from the bank hastened again to exchange it for the more stable notes. Public confidence in Law was increased, and he was enabled rapidly to proceed with the completion of the system. A decree of 27th August 1719 deprived the rival company of the farming of the revenue, and gave it to the _Compagnie des Indes_ for nine years in return for an annual payment of 52 million livres. Thus at one blow the "anti-system" was crushed. One thing yet remained; Law proposed to take over the national debt, and manage it on terms advantageous to the state. The mode of transfer was this. The debt was over 1500 million livres. Notes were to be issued to that amount, and with these the state creditors must be paid in a certain order. Shares were to be issued at intervals corresponding to the payments, and it was expected that the notes would be used in buying them. The government was to pay 3% for the loan. It had formerly been bound to pay 80 millions, it would now pay under 50, a clear gain of over 30. As the shares of the company were almost the only medium for investment, the transfer would be surely effected. The creditors would now look to the government payments and the commercial gains of the company for their annual returns. Indeed the creditors were often not able to procure the shares, for each succeeding issue was immediately seized upon, though the 500-livre share was now issued at a premium of 4500 livres. After the third issue, on the 2nd of October, the shares immediately resold at 8000 livres in the Rue Quincampoix, then used as a bourse. They went on rapidly rising as new privileges were still granted to the company. Law had now more than regal power. The exiled Stuarts paid him court; the proudest aristocracy in Europe humbled themselves before him; and his liberality made him the idol of the populace. After, as a necessary preliminary, becoming a Catholic, he was made controller-general of the finances in place of d'Argenson. Finally, in February 1720, the bank was in name as well as in reality united to the company.

The system was now complete; but it had already begun to decay. In December 1719 it was at its height. The shares had then amounted to 20,000 livres, forty times their nominal price. A sort of madness possessed the nation. Men sold their all and hastened to Paris to speculate. The population of the capital was increased by an enormous influx of provincials and foreigners. Trade received a vast though unnatural impulse. Everybody seemed to be getting richer, no one poorer. Those who could still reflect saw that this prosperity was not real. The whole issue of shares at the extreme market-price valued 12,000 million livres. It would require 600 million annual revenue to give a 5% dividend on this. Now, the whole income of the company as yet was hardly sufficient to pay 5% on the original capital of 1677 million livres. The receipts from the taxes, &c., could be precisely calculated, and it would be many years before the commercial undertakings of the company--with which only some trifling beginning had been made--would yield any considerable return. People began to sell their shares, and to buy coin, houses, land--anything that had a stable element of value in it. There was a rapid fall in the shares, a rapid rise in all kinds of property, and consequently a rapid depreciation of the paper money. Law met these new tendencies by a succession of the most violent edicts. The notes were to bear a premium over specie. Coin was only to be used in small payments, and only a small amount was to be kept in the possession of private parties. The use of diamonds, the fabrication of gold and silver plate, was forbidden. A dividend of 40% on the original capital was promised. By several ingenious but fallaciously reasoned pamphlets Law endeavoured to restore public confidence. The shares still fell. At last, on the 5th of March 1720, an edict appeared fixing their price at 9000 livres, and ordering the bank to buy and sell them at that price. The fall now was transferred to the notes, of which there were soon over 2500 million livres in circulation. A large proportion of the coined money was removed from the kingdom. Prices rose enormously. There was everywhere distress and complete financial confusion. Law became an object of popular hatred. He lost his court influence, and was obliged to consent to a decree (21st May 1720) by which the notes and consequently the shares were reduced to half their nominal value. This created such a commotion that its promoters were forced to recall it, but the mischief was done. What confidence could there be in the depreciated paper after such a measure? Law was removed from his office, and his enemies proceeded to demolish the "system." A vast number of shares had been deposited in the bank. These were destroyed. The notes were reconverted into government debt, but there was first a _visa_ which reduced that debt to the same size as before it was taken over by the company. The rate of interest was lowered, and the government now only pledged itself to pay 37 instead of 80 millions annually. Finally the bank was abolished, and the company reduced to a mere trading association. By November the "system" had disappeared. With these last measures Law, it may well be believed, had nothing to do. He left France secretly in December 1720, resumed his wandering life, and died at Venice, poor and forgotten, on the 21st of March 1729.

Of Law's writings the most important for the comprehension of the
"system" is his _Money and Trade Considered_. In this work he says
that national power and wealth consist in numbers of people, and
magazines of home and foreign goods. These depend on trade, and that
on money, of which a greater quantity employs more people; but credit,
if the credit have a circulation, has all the beneficial effects of
money. To create and increase instruments of credit is the function of
a bank. Let such be created then, and let its notes be only given in
return for land sold or pledged. Such a currency would supply the
nation with abundance of money; and it would have many advantages,
which Law points out in detail, over silver. The bank or commission
was to be a government institution, and its profits were to be spent
in encouraging the export and manufacture of the nation. A very
evident error lies at the root of the "system." Money is not the
result but the cause of wealth, he thought. To increase it then must
be beneficial, and the best way is by a properly secured paper
currency. This is the motive force; but it is to be applied in a
particular way. Law had a profound belief in the omnipotence of
government. He saw the evils of minor monopolies, and of private
farming of taxes. He proposed to centre foreign trade and internal
finance in one huge monopoly managed by the state for the people, and
carrying on business through a plentiful supply of paper money. He did
not see that trade and commerce are best left to private enterprise,
and that such a scheme would simply result in the profits of
speculators and favourites. The "system" was never so far developed as
to exhibit its inherent faults. The madness of speculators ruined the
plan when only its foundations were laid. One part indeed might have
been saved. The bank was not necessarily bound to the company, and had
its note-issue been retrenched it might have become a permanent
institution. As Thiers points out, the edict of the 5th of March
1720, which made the shares convertible into notes, ruined the bank
without saving the company. The shares had risen to an unnatural
height, and they should have been allowed to fall to their natural
level. Perhaps Law felt this to be impossible. He had friends at court
whose interests were involved in the shares, and he had enemies eager
for his overthrow. It was necessary to succeed completely or not at
all; so Law, a gambler to the core, risked and lost everything.
Notwithstanding the faults of the "system," its author was a financial
genius of the first order. He had the errors of his time; but he
propounded many truths as to the nature of currency and banking then
unknown to his contemporaries. The marvellous skill which he displayed
in adapting the theory of the "system" to the actual condition of
things in France, and in carrying out the various financial
transactions rendered necessary by its development, is absolutely
without parallel. His profound self-confidence and belief in the truth
of his own theories were the reasons alike of his success and his
ruin. He never hesitated to employ the whole force of a despotic
government for the definite ends which he saw before him. He left
France poorer than he entered it, yet he was not perceptibly changed
by his sudden transitions of fortune. Montesquieu visited him at
Venice after his fall, and has left a description of him touched with
a certain pathos. Law, he tells us, was still the same in character,
perpetually planning and scheming, and, though in poverty, revolving
vast projects to restore himself to power, and France to commercial
prosperity.

The fullest account of the Mississippi scheme is that of Thiers, _Law
et son système des finances_ (1826, American trans. 1859). See also
Heymann, _Law und sein System_ (1853); Pierre Bonnassieux, _Les
Grandes Compagnies de commerce_ (1892); S. Alexi, _John Law und sein
System_ (1885); E. Levasseur, _Récherches historiques sur le système
de Law_ (1854); and Jobez, _Une Préface au socialisme, ou le système
de Law et la chasse aux capitalistes_ (1848). Full biographical
details are given in Wood's _Life of Law_ (Edinburgh, 1824). All Law's
later writings are to be found in Daire, _Collection des principaux
économistes_, vol. i. (1843). Other works on Law are: A. W.
Wiston-Glynn, _John Law of Lauriston_ (1908); P. A. Cachut, _The
Financier Law, his Scheme and Times_ (1856); A. Macf. Davis, _An
Historical Study of Law's System_ (Boston, 1887); A. Beljame, _La
Pronunciation du nom de Jean Law le financier_ (1891). See also E. A.
Benians in _Camb. Mod. Hist._ vi. 6 (1909). For minor notices see
Poole's _Index to Periodicals_. There is a portrait of Law by A. S.
Belle in the National Portrait Gallery, London. (F. Wa.)

FOOTNOTE:

[1] A work entitled _Proposals and Reasons for constituting a Council
of Trade in Scotland_ was published anonymously at Edinburgh in 1701.
It was republished at Glasgow in 1751 with Law's name attached; but
several references in the state papers of the time mention William
Paterson (1658-1719), founder of the Bank of England, as the author
of the plan therein propounded. Even if Law had nothing to do with
the composition of the work, he must have read it and been influenced
by it. This may explain how it contains the germs of many of the
developments of the "system." Certainly the suggestion of a central
board, to manage great commercial undertakings, to furnish occupation
for the poor, to encourage mining, fishing and manufactures, and to
bring about a reduction in the rate of interest, was largely realized
in the Mississippi scheme. See Bannister's Life of William Paterson
(ed. 1858), and _Writings of William Paterson_ (2nd ed., 3 vols.,
1859).

LAW, WILLIAM (1686-1761), English divine, was born at King's Cliffe, Northamptonshire. In 1705 he entered as a sizar at Emmanuel College, Cambridge; in 1711 he was elected fellow of his college and was ordained. He resided at Cambridge, teaching and taking occasional duty until the accession of George I., when his conscience forbade him to take the oaths of allegiance to the new government and of abjuration of the Stuarts. His Jacobitism had already been betrayed in a tripos speech which brought him into trouble; and he was now deprived of his fellowship and became a non-juror. For the next few years he is said to have been a curate in London. By 1727 he was domiciled with Edward Gibbon (1666-1736) at Putney as tutor to his son Edward, father of the historian, who says that Law became "the much honoured friend and spiritual director of the whole family." In the same year he accompanied his pupil to Cambridge, and resided with him as governor, in term time, for the next four years. His pupil then went abroad, but Law was left at Putney, where he remained in Gibbon's house for more than ten years, acting as a religious guide not only to the family but to a number of earnest-minded folk who came to consult him. The most eminent of these were the two brothers John and Charles Wesley, John Byrom the poet, George Cheyne the physician and Archibald Hutcheson, M.P. for Hastings. The household was dispersed in 1737. Law was parted from his friends, and in 1740 retired to King's Cliffe, where he had inherited from his father a house and a small property. There he was presently joined by two ladies: Mrs Hutcheson, the rich widow of his old friend, who recommended her on his death-bed to place herself under Law's spiritual guidance, and Miss Hester Gibbon, sister to his late pupil. This curious trio lived for twenty-one years a life wholly given to devotion, study and charity, until the death of Law on the 9th of April 1761.

Law was a busy writer under three heads:--

1. _Controversy._--In this field he had no contemporary peer save
perhaps Richard Bentley. The first of his controversial works was
_Three Letters to the Bishop of Bangor_ (1717), which were considered
by friend and foe alike as one of the most powerful contributions to
the Bangorian controversy on the high church side. Thomas Sherlock
declared that "Mr Law was a writer so considerable that he knew but
one good reason why his lordship did not answer him." Law's next
controversial work was _Remarks on Mandeville's Fable of the Bees_
(1723), in which he vindicates morality on the highest grounds; for
pure style, caustic wit and lucid argument this work is remarkable; it
was enthusiastically praised by John Sterling, and republished by F.
D. Maurice. Law's _Case of Reason_ (1732), in answer to Tindal's
_Christianity as old as the Creation_ is to a great extent an
anticipation of Bishop Butler's famous argument in the _Analogy_. In
this work Law shows himself at least the equal of the ablest champion
of Deism. His _Letters to a Lady inclined to enter the Church of Rome_
are excellent specimens of the attitude of a high Anglican towards
Romanism. His controversial writings have not received due
recognition, partly because they were opposed to the drift of his
times, partly because of his success in other fields.

2. _Practical Divinity._--The _Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life_
(1728), together with its predecessor, _A Treatise of Christian
Perfection_ (1726), deeply influenced the chief actors in the great
Evangelical revival. The Wesleys, George Whitefield, Henry Venn,
Thomas Scott and Thomas Adam all express their deep obligation to the
author. The _Serious Call_ affected others quite as deeply. Samuel
Johnson, Gibbon, Lord Lyttelton and Bishop Horne all spoke
enthusiastically of its merits; and it is still the only work by which
its author is popularly known. It has high merits of style, being
lucid and pointed to a degree. In a tract entitled _The Absolute
Unlawfulness of Stage Entertainments_ (1726) Law was tempted by the
corruptions of the stage of the period to use unreasonable language,
and incurred some effective criticism from John Dennis in _The Stage
Defended_.

3. _Mysticism._--Though the least popular, by far the most
interesting, original and suggestive of all Law's works are those
which he wrote in his later years, after he had become an enthusiastic
admirer (not a disciple) of Jacob Boehme, the Teutonic theosophist.
From his earliest years he had been deeply impressed with the piety,
beauty and thoughtfulness of the writings of the Christian mystics,
but it was not till after his accidental meeting with the works of
Boehme, about 1734, that pronounced mysticism appeared in his works.
Law's mystic tendencies divorced him from the practical-minded Wesley,
but in spite of occasional wild fancies the books are worth reading.
They are _A Demonstration of the Gross and Fundamental Errors of a
late Book called a "Plain Account, &c., of the Lord's Supper_" (1737);
_The Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Regeneration_ (1739); _An
Appeal to all that Doubt and Disbelieve the Truths of Revelation_
(1740); _An Earnest and Serious Answer to Dr Trapp's Sermon on being
Righteous Overmuch_ (1740); _The Spirit of Prayer_ (1749, 1752); _The
Way to Divine Knowledge_ (1752); _The Spirit of Love_ (1752, 1754); _A
Short but Sufficient Confutation of Dr Warburton's Projected Defence
(as he calls it) of Christianity in his "Divine Legation of Moses"_
(1757); _A Series of Letters_ (1760); a _Dialogue between a Methodist
and a Churchman_ (1760); and _An Humble, Earnest and Affectionate
Address to the Clergy_ (1761).

Richard Tighe wrote a short account of Law's life in 1813. See also
Christopher Walton, _Notes and Materials for a Complete Biography of
W. Law_ (1848); Sir Leslie Stephen, _English Thought in the 18th
century_, and in the _Dict. Nat. Biog._ (xxxii. 236); W. H. Lecky,
_History of England in the 18th Century_; C. J. Abbey, _The English
Church in the 18th Century_; and J. H. Overton, _William Law, Nonjuror
and Mystic_ (1881).

LAW (O. Eng. _lagu_, M. Eng. _lawe_; from an old Teutonic root _lag_, "lie," what lies fixed or evenly; cf. Lat. _lex_, Fr. _loi_), a word used in English in two main senses--(1) as a rule prescribed by authority for human action, and (2) in scientific and philosophic phraseology, as a uniform order of sequence (e.g. "laws" of motion). In the first sense the word is used either in the abstract, for jurisprudence generally or for a state of things in which the laws of a country are duly observed ("law and order"), or in the concrete for some particular rule or body of rules. It is usual to distinguish further between "law" and "equity" (q.v.). The scientific and philosophic usage has grown out of an early conception of jurisprudence, and is really metaphorical, derived from the phrase "natural law" or "law of nature," which presumed that commands were laid on matter by God (see T. E. Holland, _Elements of Jurisprudence_, ch. ii.). The adjective "legal" is only used in the first sense, never in the second. In the case of the "moral law" (see ETHICS) the term is employed somewhat ambiguously because of its connexion with both meanings. There is also an Old English use of the word "law" in a more or less sporting sense ("to give law" or "allow so much law"), meaning a start or fair allowance in time or distance. Presumably this originated simply in the liberty-loving Briton's respect for proper legal procedure; instead of the brute exercise of tyrannous force he demanded "law," or a fair opportunity and trial. But it may simply be an extension of the meaning of "right," or of the sense of "leave" which is found in early uses of the French _loi_.

In this work the laws or uniformities of the physical universe are dealt with in the articles on the various sciences. The general principles of law in the legal sense are discussed under JURISPRUDENCE. What may be described as "national systems" of law are dealt with historically and generally under ENGLISH LAW, AMERICAN LAW, ROMAN LAW, GREEK LAW, MAHOMMEDAN LAW, INDIAN LAW, &c. Certain broad divisions of law are treated under CONSTITUTION AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CANON LAW, CIVIL LAW, COMMON LAW, CRIMINAL LAW, ECCLESIASTICAL LAW, EQUITY, INTERNATIONAL LAW, MILITARY LAW, &c. And the particular laws of different countries on special subjects are stated under the headings for those subjects (BANKRUPTCY, &c.). For courts (q.v.) of law, and procedure, see JURISPRUDENCE, APPEAL, TRIAL, KING'S BENCH, &c.

AUTHORITIES.--The various legal articles have bibliographies attached,
but it may be convenient here to mention such general works on law,
apart from the science of jurisprudence, as (for English law) Lord
Halsbury's _Laws of England_ (vol. i., 1907), _The Encyclopaedia of
the Laws of England_, ed. Wood Renton (1907), Stephen's _Commentaries
on the Laws of England_ (1908), Brett's _Commentaries on the present
Laws of England_ (1896), Broom's _Commentaries on the Common Law_
(1896) and Brodie-Innes's _Comparative Principles of the Laws of
England and Scotland_ (vol. i., 1903); and, for America, Bouvier's
_Law Dictionary_, and Kent's _Commentaries on American Law_.

LAWES, HENRY (1595-1662), English musician, was born at Dinton in Wiltshire in December 1595, and received his musical education from John Cooper, better known under his Italian pseudonym Giovanni Coperario (d. 1627), a famous composer of the day. In 1626 he was received as one of the gentlemen of the chapel royal, which place he held till the Commonwealth put a stop to church music. But even during that songless time Lawes continued his work as a composer, and the famous collection of his vocal pieces, _Ayres and Dialogues for One, Two and Three Voyces_, was published in 1653, being followed by two other books under the same title in 1655 and 1658 respectively. When in 1660 the king returned, Lawes once more entered the royal chapel, and composed an anthem for the coronation of Charles II. He died on the 21st of October 1662, and was buried in Westminster Abbey. Lawes's name has become known beyond musical circles by his friendship with Milton, whose _Comus_ he supplied with incidental music for the performance of the masque in 1634. The poet in return immortalized his friend in the famous sonnet in which Milton, with a musical perception not common amongst poets, exactly indicates the great merit of Lawes. His careful attention to the words of the poet, the manner in which his music seems to grow from those words, the perfect coincidence of the musical with the metrical accent, all put Lawes's songs on a level with those of Schumann or Liszt or any modern composer. At the same time he is by no means wanting in genuine melodic invention, and his concerted music shows the learned contrapuntist.

LAWES, SIR JOHN BENNET, BART. (1814-1900), English agriculturist, was born at Rothamsted on the 28th of December 1814. Even before leaving Oxford, where he matriculated in 1832, he had begun to interest himself in growing various medicinal plants on the Rothamsted estates, which he inherited on his father's death in 1822. About 1837 he began to experiment on the effects of various manures on plants growing in pots, and a year or two later the experiments were extended to crops in the field. One immediate consequence was that in 1842 he patented a manure formed by treating phosphates with sulphuric acid, and thus initiated the artificial manure industry. In the succeeding year he enlisted the services of Sir J. H. Gilbert, with whom he carried on for more than half a century those experiments in raising crops and feeding animals which have rendered Rothamsted famous in the eyes of scientific agriculturists all over the world (see AGRICULTURE). In 1854 he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society, which in 1867 bestowed a Royal medal on Lawes and Gilbert jointly, and in 1882 he was created a baronet. In the year before his death, which happened on the 31st of August 1900, he took measures to ensure the continued existence of the Rothamsted experimental farm by setting aside £100,000 for that purpose and constituting the Lawes Agricultural Trust, composed of four members from the Royal Society, two from the Royal Agricultural Society, one each from the Chemical and Linnaean Societies, and the owner of Rothamsted mansion-house for the time being.

LAW MERCHANT or LEX MERCATORIA, originally a body of rules and principles relating to merchants and mercantile transactions, laid down by merchants themselves for the purpose of regulating their dealings. It was composed of such usages and customs as were common to merchants and traders in all parts of Europe, varied slightly in different localities by special peculiarities. The law merchant owed its origin to the fact that the civil law was not sufficiently responsive to the growing demands of commerce, as well as to the fact that trade in pre-medieval times was practically in the hands of those who might be termed cosmopolitan merchants, who wanted a prompt and effective jurisdiction. It was administered for the most part in special courts, such as those of the gilds in Italy, or the fair courts of Germany and France, or as in England, in courts of the staple or piepowder (see also SEA LAWS). The history of the law merchant in England is divided into three stages: the first prior to the time of Coke, when it was a special kind of law--as distinct from the common law--administered in special courts for a special class of the community (i.e. the mercantile); the second stage was one of transition, the law merchant being administered in the common law courts, but as a body of customs, to be proved as a fact in each individual case of doubt; the third stage, which has continued to the present day, dates from the presidency over the king's bench of Lord Mansfield (q.v.), under whom it was moulded into the mercantile law of to-day. To the law merchant modern English law owes the fundamental principles in the law of partnership, negotiable instruments and trade marks.

See G. Malynes, _Consuetudo vel lex mercatoria_ (London, 1622); W.
Mitchell, _The Early History of the Law Merchant_ (Cambridge, 1904);
J. W. Smith, _Mercantile Law_ (ed. Hart and Simey, 1905).

LAWN, a very thin fabric made from level linen or cotton yarns. It is used for light dresses and trimmings, also for handkerchiefs. The terms lawn and cambric (q.v.) are often intended to indicate the same fabric. The word "lawn" was formerly derived from the French name for the fabric _linon_, from _lin_, flax, linen, but Skeat (_Etym. Dict._, 1898, Addenda) and A. Thomas (_Romania_, xxix. 182, 1900) have shown that the real source of the word is to be found in the name of the French town Laon. Skeat quotes from Palsgrave, _Les claircissement de la langue Françoÿse_ (1530), showing that the early name of the fabric was _Laune lynen_. An early form of the word was "laund," probably due to an adaptation to "laund," lawn, glade or clearing in a forest, now used of a closely-mown expanse of grass in a garden, park, &c. (see GRASS and HORTICULTURE). This word comes from O. Fr. _launde_, mod. _lande___, wild, heathy or sandy ground, covered with scrub or brushwood, a word of Celtic origin; cf. Irish and Breton _lann_, heathy ground, also enclosure, land; Welsh _llan_, enclosure. It is cognate with "land," common to Teutonic languages. In the original sense of clearing in a forest, glade, Lat. _saltus_, "lawn," still survives in the New Forest, where it is used of the feeding-places of cattle.

LAWN-TENNIS, a game played with racquet and ball on a court traversed by a net, but without enclosing walls. It is a modern adaptation of the ancient game of tennis (q.v.), with which it is identical as regards the scoring of the game and "set." Lawn-tennis is essentially a summer game, played in the open air, either on courts marked with whitewash on close-cut grass like a cricket pitch, or on asphalt, cinders, gravel, wood, earth or other substance which can be so prepared as to afford a firm, level and smooth surface. In winter, however, the game is often played on the floor of gymnasiums, drill sheds or other buildings, when it is called "covered-court lawn-tennis"; but there is no difference in the game itself corresponding to these varieties of court.

The lawn-tennis court for the single-handed game, one player against one ("singles"), is shown in fig. 1, and that for the four-handed game ("doubles") in fig. 2. The net stretched across the middle of the court is attached to the tops of two posts which stand 3 ft. outside the court on each side. The height of the net is 3 ft. 6 in. at the posts and 3 ft. at the centre. The court is bisected longitudinally by the half-court-line, which, however, is marked only between the two service-lines and at the points of junction with the base-lines. The divisions of the court on each side of the half-court-line are called respectively the right-hand and left-hand courts; and the portion of these divisions between the service-lines and the net are the right-hand service-court and left-hand service-court respectively. The balls, which are made of hollow india-rubber, tightly covered with white flannel, are 2½ in. in diameter, and from 1(7/8) to 2 oz. in weight. The racquets (fig. 3), for which there are no regulation dimensions, are broader and lighter than those used in tennis.

Before play begins, a racquet is spun as in tennis, and the winner of the spin elects either to take first service or to take choice of courts. If he takes choice of courts, he and his partner (if the game be doubles) take their position on the selected side of the net, one stationing himself in the right-hand court and the other in the left, which positions are retained throughout the set. If the winner of the spin takes choice of courts, his opponent has first service; and vice versa. The players change sides of the net at the end of the first, third and every subsequent alternate game, and at the end of each set; but they may agree not to change during any set except the last. Service is delivered by each player in turn, who retains it for one game irrespective of the winning or losing of points. In doubles the partner of the server in the first game serves in the third, and the partner of the server in the second game serves in the fourth; the same order being preserved till the end of the set; but each pair of partners decide for themselves before their first turn of service which of the two shall serve first. The server delivers the service from the right- and left-hand courts alternately, beginning in each of his service games from the right-hand court, even though odds be given or owed; he must stand behind (i.e. farther from the net than) the base-line, and must serve the ball so that it drops in the opponent's service-court diagonally opposite to the court served from, or upon one of the lines enclosing that service-court. If in a serve, otherwise good, the ball touches the net, it is a "let" whether the serve be "taken" or not by striker-out; a "let" does not annul a previous "fault." (For the meaning of "let," "rest," "striker-out" and other technical terms used in the game, see TENNIS and RACQUETS.) The serve is a fault (1) if it be not delivered by the server from the proper court, and from behind the base-line; (2) if the ball drops into the net or out-of-court, or into any part of the court other than the proper service-court. The striker-out cannot, as in racquets, "take," and thereby condone, a fault. When a fault has been served, the server must serve again from the same court, unless it was a fault because served from the wrong court, in which case the server crosses to the proper court before serving again. Two consecutive faults score a point against the side of the server. Lawn-tennis differs from tennis and racquets in that the service may not be taken on the volley by striker-out. After the serve has been returned the play proceeds until the "rest" (or "rally") ends by one side or the other failing to make a "good return"; a good return in lawn-tennis meaning a stroke by which the ball, having been hit with the racquet before its second bound, is sent over the net, even if it touches the net, so as to fall within the limits of the court on the opposite side. A point is scored by the player, or side, whose opponent fails to return the serve or to make a good return in the rest. A player also loses a point if the ball when in play touches him or his partner, or their clothes; or if he or his racquet touches the net or any of its supports while the ball is in play; or if he leaps over the net to avoid touching it; or if he volley the ball before it has passed the net.

For him who would excel in lawn-tennis a strong fast service is hardly
less necessary than a heavily "cut" service to the tennis player and
the racquet player. High overhand service, by which alone any great
pace can be obtained, was first perfected by the brothers Renshaw
between 1880 and 1890, and is now universal even among players far
below the first rank. The service in vogue among the best players in
America, and from this circumstance known as the "American service,"
has less pace than the English but is "cut" in such a way that it
swerves in the air and "drags" off the ground, the advantage being
that it gives the server more time to "run in" after his serve, so as
to volley his opponent's return from a position within a yard or two
of the net. Both in singles and doubles the best players often make it
their aim to get up comparatively near the net as soon as possible,
whether they are serving or receiving the serve, the object being to
volley the ball whenever possible before it begins to fall. The
server's partner, in doubles, stands about a yard and a half from the
net, and rather nearer the side-line than the half-court-line; the
receiver of the service, not being allowed to volley the serve, must
take his stand according to the nature of the service, which, if very
fast, will require him to stand outside the base-line; the receiver's
partner usually stands between the net and the service-line. All four
players, if the rest lasts beyond a stroke or two, are generally found
nearer to the net than the service-lines; and the game, assuming the
players to be of the championship class, consists chiefly of rapid low
volleying, varied by attempts on one side or the other to place the
ball out of the opponents' reach by "lobbing" it over their heads into
the back part of the court. Good "lobbing" demands great skill, to
avoid on the one hand sending the ball out of court beyond the
base-line, and on the other allowing it to drop short enough for the
adversary to kill it with a "smashing" volley. Of "lobbing" it has
been laid down by the brothers Doherty that "the higher it is the
better, so long as the length is good"; and as regards returning lobs
the same authorities say, "you must get them if you can before they
drop, for it is usually fatal to let them drop when playing against a
good pair." The reason for this is that if the lob be allowed to drop
before being returned, so much time is given to the striker of it to
gain position that he is almost certain to be able to kill the return,
unless the lob be returned by an equally good and very high lob,
dropping within a foot or so of the base-line in the opposite court, a
stroke that requires the utmost accuracy of strength to accomplish
safely. The game in the hands of first-class players consists largely
in manoeuvring for favourable position in the court while driving the
opponent into a less favourable position on his side of the net; the
player who gains the advantage of position in this way being generally
able to finish the rest by a smashing volley impossible to return.
Ability to play this "smash" stroke is essential to strong
lawn-tennis. "To be good overhead," say the Dohertys, "is the sign of
a first-class player, even if a few have managed to get on without
it." The smash stroke is played very much in the same way as the
overhand service, except that it is not from a defined position of
known distance from the net; and therefore when making it the player
must realize almost instinctively what his precise position is in
relation to the net and the side-lines, for it is of the last
importance that he should not take his eye off the ball "even for the
hundredth part of a second." By drawing the racquet across the ball at
the moment of impact spin may be imparted to it as in tennis, or as
"side" is imparted to a billiard ball, and the direction of this spin
and the consequent behaviour of the ball after the stroke may be
greatly varied by a skilful player. Perhaps the most generally useful
form of spin, though by no means the only one commonly used, is that
known as "top" or "lift," a vertical rotatory motion of the ball in
the same direction as its flight, which is imparted to it by an upward
draw of the racquet at the moment of making the stroke, and the effect
of which is to make it drop more suddenly than it would ordinarily do,
and in an unexpected curve. A drive made with plenty of "top" can be
hit much harder than would otherwise be possible without sending the
ball out of court, and it is therefore extensively employed by the
best players. While the volleying game is almost universally the
practice of first-class players--A. W. Gore, M. J. G. Ritchie and S.
H. Smith being almost alone among those of championship rank in modern
days to use the volley comparatively little--its difficulty places it
beyond the reach of the less skilful. In lawn-tennis as played at the
ordinary country house or local club the real "smash" of a Renshaw or
a Doherty is seldom to be seen, and the high lob is almost equally
rare. Players of moderate calibre are content to take the ball on the
bound and to return it with some pace along the side-lines or across
the court, with the aim of placing it as artfully as possible beyond
the reach of the adversary; and if now and again they venture to
imitate a stroke employed with killing effect at Wimbledon, they think
themselves fortunate if they occasionally succeed in making it without
disaster to themselves.

Before 1890 the method of handicapping at lawn-tennis was the same as
in tennis so far as it was applicable to a game played in an open
court. In 1890 bisques were abolished, and in 1894 an elaborate system
was introduced by which fractional parts of "fifteen" could be
conceded by way of handicap, in accordance with tables inserted in the
laws of the game. The system is a development of the tennis
handicapping by which a finer graduation of odds may be given.
"One-sixth of fifteen" is one stroke given in every six games of a
set; and similarly two-sixths, three-sixths, four-sixths and
five-sixths of fifteen, are respectively two, three, four and five
strokes given in every six games of a set; the particular game in the
set in which the stroke in each case must be given being specified in
the tables.

_History._--Lawn-tennis cannot be said to have existed prior to the year 1874. It is, indeed, true that outdoor games based on tennis were from time to time improvised by lovers of that game who found themselves out of reach of a tennis-court. Lord Arthur Hervey, sometime bishop of Bath and Wells, had thus devised a game which he and his friends played on the lawn of his rectory in Suffolk; and even so early as the end of the 18th century "field tennis" was mentioned by the _Sporting Magazine_ as a game that rivalled the popularity of cricket. But, however much or little this game may have resembled lawn-tennis, it had long ceased to exist; and even to be remembered, when in 1874 Major Wingfield took out a patent for a game called Sphairistike, which the specification described as "a new and improved portable court for playing the ancient game of tennis." The court for this game was wider at the base-lines than at the net, giving the whole court the shape of an hour-glass; one side of the net only was divided into service-courts, service being always delivered from a fixed mark in the centre of the opposite court; and from the net-posts side-nets were fixed which tapered down to the ground at about the middle of the side-lines, thus enclosing nearly half the courts on each side of the net. The possibilities of Sphairistike were quickly perceived; and under the new name of lawn-tennis its popularity grew so quickly that in 1875 a meeting of those interested in the game was held at Lord's cricket-ground, where a committee of the Marylebone Club (M.C.C.) was appointed to draw up a code of rules. The hour-glass shape of the court was retained by this code (issued in May 1875), and the scoring of the game followed in the main the racquets instead of the tennis model. It was at the suggestion of J. M. Heathcote, the amateur tennis champion, that balls covered with white flannel were substituted for the uncovered balls used at first. In 1875, through the influence of Henry Jones ("Cavendish"), lawn-tennis was included in the programme of the All England Croquet Club, which in 1877 became the All England Croquet and Lawn-Tennis Club, on whose ground at Wimbledon the All England championships have been annually played since that date. In the same year, in anticipation of the first championship meeting, the club appointed a committee consisting of Henry Jones, Julian Marshall and C. G. Heathcote to revise the M.C.C. code of rules; the result of their labours being the introduction of the tennis in place of the racquets scoring, the substitution of a rectangular for the "hour-glass" court, and the enactment of the modern rule as regards the "fault." The height of the net, which under the M.C.C. rules had been 4 ft. in the centre, was reduced to 3 ft. 3 in.; and regulations as to the size and weight of the ball were also made. Some controversy had already taken place in the columns of the _Field_ as to whether volleying the ball, at all events within a certain distance of the net, should not be prohibited. Spencer Gore, the first to win the championship in 1877, used the volley with great skill and judgment, and in principle anticipated the tactics afterwards brought to perfection by the Renshaws, which aimed at forcing the adversary back to the base-line and killing his return with a volley from a position near the net. P. F. Hadow, champion in 1878, showed how the volley might be defeated by skilful use of the lob; but the question of placing some check on the volley continued to be agitated among lovers of the game. The rapidly growing popularity of lawn-tennis was proved in 1879 by the inauguration at Oxford of the four-handed championship, and at Dublin of the Irish championship, and by the fact that there were forty-five competitors for the All England single championship at Wimbledon, won by J. T. Hartley, a player who chiefly relied on the accuracy of his return without frequent resort to the volley. It was in the autumn of the same year, in a tournament at Cheltenham, that W. Renshaw made his first successful appearance in public. The year 1880 saw the foundation of the Northern Lawn-Tennis Association, whose tournaments have long been regarded as inferior in importance only to the championship meetings at Wimbledon and Dublin, and a revision of the rules which substantially made them what they have ever since remained. This year is also memorable for the first championship doubles won by the twin brothers William and Ernest Renshaw, a success which the former followed up by winning the Irish championship, beating among others H. F. Lawford for the first time.

The Renshaws had already developed the volleying game at the net, and had shown what could be done with the "smash" stroke (which became known by their name as the "Renshaw smash"), but their service had not as yet become very severe. In 1881 the distinctive features of their style were more marked, and the brothers first established firmly the supremacy which they maintained almost without interruption for the next eight years. In the doubles they discarded the older tactics of one partner standing back and the other near the net; the two Renshaws stood about the same level, just inside the service-line, and from there volleyed with relentless severity and with an accuracy never before equalled, and seldom if ever since; while their service also acquired an immense increase of pace. Their chief rival, and the leading exponent of the non-volleying game for several years, was H. F. Lawford. After a year or two it became evident that neither the volleying tactics of Renshaw nor the strong back play of Lawford would be adopted to the exclusion of the other, and both players began to combine the two styles. Thus the permanent features of lawn-tennis may be said to have been firmly established by about the year 1885; and the players who have since then come to the front have for the most part followed the principles laid down by the Renshaws and Lawford. One of the greatest performances at lawn-tennis was in the championship competition in 1886 when W. Renshaw beat Lawford a love set in 9½ minutes. The longest rest in first-class lawn-tennis occurred in a match between Lawford and E. Lubbock in 1880, when eighty-one strokes were played. Among players in the first class who were contemporaries of the Renshaws, mention should be made of E. de S. Browne, a powerful imitator of the Renshaw style; C. W. Grinstead, R. T. Richardson, V. Goold (who played under the _nom de plume_ "St Leger"), J. T. Hartley, E. W. Lewis, E. L. Williams, H. Grove and W. J. Hamilton; while among the most prominent lady players of the period were Miss M. Langrishe, Miss Bradley, Miss Maud Watson, Miss L. Dod, Miss Martin and Miss Bingley (afterwards Mrs Hillyard). In 1888 the Lawn-Tennis Association was established; and the All England Mixed Doubles Championship (four-handed matches for ladies and gentlemen in partnership) was added to the existing annual competitions. Since 1881 lawn-tennis matches between Oxford and Cambridge universities have been played annually; and almost every county in England, besides Scotland, Wales and districts such as "Midland Counties," "South of England," &c., have their own championship meetings. Tournaments are also played in winter at Nice, Monte Carlo and other Mediterranean resorts where most of the competitors are English visitors.

The results of the All England championships have been as follows:--