[1022] For the record of the proceedings in Ireland see Report of the Cases of Regina v. Millis, et Regina v. Carroll in the Queen's Bench in Ireland (Dublin, 1842).
[1023] Bishop, Mar., Div., and Sep., I, §§ 400, 401.
[1024] The case is given in 10 Clark and Finnelly, Reports of Cases Decided in the House of Lords, 534-907. The text of the opinion of the English judges may also be found in Stephens, Laws of the Clergy, I, 675-94. It was ably refuted by Sir John Stoddart in his Observations on the Opinion and his Letter to Lord Brougham (both London, 1844).
[1025] In 1844, by the act of 7 and 8 Victoria, c. 81, the essential features of 6 and 7 Will. IV, c. 85, which had made the public observance of ecclesiastical or civil forms necessary to a valid marriage in England, were extended to Ireland; and this was the result of the excitement caused by the case of the Queen v. Millis of the same year.
[1026] Case of Beamish v. Beamish in 9 House of Lords Cases, 274-358. The report in this case, like that in Queen v. Millis, constitutes an extended history of English matrimonial law.
[1027] In Bright v. Hutton, 3 H. L. C., 391, 392. For his opinion in 1860 see A.-G. v. Dean and Canons of Windsor, 8 H. L. C., 391-93.
[1028] Following Pollock, First Book of Jurisprudence (London, 1896), 311-17.
In general, on these decisions and those preceding see the masterly discussion of Friedberg, Eheschliessung, 39-57, 427, 464 ff. His conclusions are supported by Sohm, Eheschliessung, 125 ff.; Pollock and Maitland, Hist. of Eng. Law, II, 367 ff.; and by the article of Elphinstone, in Law Quarterly Review, V, 49 ff. Compare Reeves, Hist. of the Common Law, IV, 52 ff.; Bishop, Marriage, Divorce, and Separation, II, 171, 172; Kent, Commentaries, II, 87 ff., notes; Bright, Husband and Wife, II, 398. These judgments are regarded as historically just by Dieckhoff, Die kirch. Trauung, 70, note; and Cook, "The Marriage Ceremony in Europe," Atlantic, LXI.
[1029] Esmein, Le mariage en droit canonique, I, 3, 4, distinguishes the three phases in the growth of the canon law: "D'abord, elle s'est développée à côté du droit séculier, celuici restant indépendant et souverain dans son domaine, et n'a exercé qu'une action parallèle. Dans une seconde phase, elle a supplanté et éliminé le droit séculier, elle seule régissant le mariage dans l'Europe chrétienne. Enfin, devant un reflux puissant de la législation civile, elle a dû, dans le temps moderne, abandonner le terrain qu'elle avait ainsi occupé, pour garder seulement son autorité première, et reprendre son ancienne position."
[1030] For examples see Ignatius, Epis. to Philadel., c. iv; Epis. to Polycarp, c. v, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, I, 81, 95; Justin, First Apol., cxv, ibid., 167; Athenagoras, Plea for Christians, c. xxxiii, ibid., II, 147; Clement of Alex., ibid., 259-63, 377-79. In this last passage Clement is less coarse than usual. "Marriage, then, as a sacred image," he concludes, "must be kept pure from those things which defile it." Cf. also Tertullian, ibid., III, 293-95, 443; Origen, To His Wife, ibid., IV, 40-44. Compare Bucksisch, De apostolis uxoratis, 9 ff., who holds that, with the exception of John and Paul, all the apostles had wives. In general, on the development of the early Christian conception of marriage from its Roman and Hebrew beginnings, see Freisen, Geschichte des can. Eherechts, 32 ff.; Zhishman, Das Eherecht der orient. Kirche, 93 ff.; Schulte, Der Cölibatszwang, 5 ff.; Theiner, Die Einführ. der erz. Ehelosigkeit, I, 5 ff.; Stäudlin, Geschichte der Vorstellungen und Lehren von der Ehe, 259 ff.; Letters on the Const. Celibacy of the Clergy, 22 ff., 51 ff.; Recherches phil. et hist. sur le célibat, 67 ff. On the influence of Paul's teaching see Thwing, The Family, 47 ff.; and compare Nisbet, Marriage and Heredity, 33-57, who takes an unfavorable view of the influence of the church as opposed to that of Christianity; and Gage, Woman, Church, and State, 49 ff.; Huth, Marriage of Near Kin, 108 ff.