[1439] Amendments to the Civil Code (1895), chap. 68.
[1440] Rev. Stat. of Idaho (1887), 302; Comp. Codes and Stat. of Mont. (1895), 476; Stat. of S. D. (1899), II, 1020.
[1441] Code of Iowa (1897), 1124; same in ibid. (1860), 428. Cf. ibid. (1851), secs. 1474, 1475. Thus the common-law contract is good: see Blanchard v. Lambert, 43 Ia. Reports, 228.
[1442] Horner, Rev. Stat. of Ind. (1896), II, sec. 5330; Burns, Ann. Stat. (1901), III, 705.
[1443] Mills, Ann. Stat. of Col. (1891), II, 1680. The Gen. Laws of Col. (1877), 613, show the exigencies of pioneer life in the provision that "all marriages which have been solemnized in this state, whether by any president or judge of any mining district, elected under and acting by the laws thereof," shall be valid. So in Oregon by an act of Jan. 17, 1854 (Stat. of Ore., 494), marriages contracted, with the consent of the parties, "when their residence is remote from any person duly authorized to solemnize such marriage, in any other manner than is prescribed, shall be valid; Provided that no legal impediment shall exist thereto; such contracts shall be made in writing duly attested, and shall be recorded in the office of the recorder of deeds of the proper county, within sixty days."
[1444] Carmichael v. State, 12 Ohio Reports, 553.
[1445] On the definition of marriage see Smith v. Smith, 17 N. Y. Rep., 76; and on marriage as a question of status, Sewall v. Sewall, 122 Mass., 156; Watkins v. Watkins, 135 Mass., 84.
[1446] "Marriage is a civil contract, requiring the consent of the parties capable of entering into other contracts, except as herein otherwise noted."—Code of Iowa (1897), 1123; cf. ibid. (1851), sec. 1464; ibid. (1873), sec. 2186.
[1447] "Marriage, so far as its validity in law is concerned, shall continue in this state a civil contract, to which the consent of parties capable in law of contracting, shall be essential."—Rev. Stat. of N. Y. (1827-28), II, 138; cf. ibid. (1889), IV, 2595.
[1448] "Mutual promises to marry in the future, though made by parties competent to contract, and followed by cohabitation as husband and wife, is not, in itself, a valid marriage."—Duncan v. Duncan, 10 Ohio Reports, 181.