marriage; the emphasis on the sanctity of a merely formal union discourages the growth of moral responsibility as regards the hypothetically unholy unions which grow up beneath its shadow.  To insist, on the other hand, by establishing facility of divorce, that sexual unions shall be real, is to work in the cause of morality.  The lands in which divorce by mutual consent has prevailed longest are probably among the most, and not the least, moral of lands.

Surprise has been expressed that although divorce by mutual consent commended itself as an obviously just and reasonable measure two thousand years ago to the legally-minded Romans that solution has even yet been so rarely attained by modern states.[351] Wherever society is established on a solidly organized basis and the claims of reason and humanity receive due consideration—­even when the general level of civilization is not in every respect high—­there we find a tendency to divorce by mutual consent.

In Japan, according to the new Civil Code, much as in ancient Rome, marriage is effected by giving notice of the fact to the registrar in the presence of two witnesses, and with the consent (in the case of young couples) of the heads of their families.  There may be a ceremony, but it is not demanded by the law.  Divorce is effected in exactly the same way, by simply having the registration cancelled, provided both husband and wife are over twenty-five years of age.  For younger couples unhappily married, and for cases in which mutual consent cannot be obtained, judicial divorce exists.  This is granted for various specific causes, of which the most important is “grave insult, such as to render living together unbearable” (Ernest W. Clement, “The New Woman in Japan,” American Journal Sociology, March, 1903).  Such a system, like so much else achieved by Japanese organization, seems reasonable, guarded, and effective.

In the very different and far more ancient marriage system of China, divorce by mutual consent is equally well-established.  Such divorce by mutual consent takes place for incompatibility of temperament, or when both husband and wife desire it.  There are, however, various antiquated and peculiar provisions in the Chinese marriage laws, and divorce is compulsory for the wife’s adultery or serious physical injuries inflicted by either party on the other. (The marriage laws of China are fully set forth by Paul d’Enjoy, La Revue, Sept. 1, 1905.)

Among the Eskimo (who, as readers of Nansen’s fascinating books on their morals will know, are in some respects a highly socialized people) the sexes are absolutely equal, marriages are perfectly free, and separation is equally free.  The result is that there are no uncongenial unions, and that no unpleasant word is heard between man and wife (Stefansson, Harper’s Magazine, Nov., 1908).

Among the ancient Welsh, women, both