ABATTOIR.

ABANDONMENT is a term used in marine insurance. Before a person who has insured a ship or goods can demand from an insurer or underwriter the stipulated compensation for a total loss of such ship or goods, he must abandon or relinquish to the insurer all his interest in any part of the property which may be saved.

ABATTOIR, the name given by the French to the public slaughter-houses which were established in Paris by a decree of Napoleon in 1810, and finished in 1818. There are three on the north, and two on the south side of Paris, not far from the barriers, and about two miles from the centre of the city. The cattle markets for the supply of Paris are several miles distant, and the cattle are driven from them round the exterior boulevards to the abattoirs, and consequently do not enter the city. The consumption of Paris in 1840 was 92,402 oxen, 437,359 sheep, 90,190 pigs, and 20,684 calves: the number of butchers, all of whom are required to take out a licence, does not much exceed five hundred. At one of the abattoirs each butcher has his slaughter-house, a place for keeping the meat, an iron rack for tallow, pans for melting it, and a place with convenience for giving cattle hay and water, and where they may be kept before being slaughtered. A fixed sum is charged for this accommodation, and in 1843 the fee was 6 francs for each ox, 4 fr. for a cow, 2 fr. for a calf, and 10 c. for a sheep. The income of the establishment, arising from these fees, the sale of manure, &c., was above 48,000l. in 1842. It is stated in Dulaure's 'Paris,' that the fee paid for each head of cattle

ABATTOIR.

includes all the expenses of slaughtering; but a witness who was examined before a Parliamentary Committee on Smithfield Market, and who had visited Paris for the purpose of inspecting the abattoirs, says that the butchers employ their own men. Dulaure's account is probably correct. The butchers can have their cattle slaughtered at any hour of the night, but they must take away the meat at night. There is an inspector appointed at each abattoir, and means are taken to prevent unwholesome meat getting into consumption. There are slaughter-houses under public regulations in most of the continental cities; and those of New York and Philadelphia and some other of the cities of the American Union are, it is said, placed on a similar footing. The medical profession in France attach great importance to slaughter-houses being strictly regulated, and removed from the midst of the population.

The great cattle-market in Smithfield for the supply of London existed above five centuries ago, but the spot was at that time a piece of waste ground beyond the city, instead of being, as at present, surrounded by a dense population. In 1842 there were sold in Smithfield Market 175,347 cattle, and 1,468,960 sheep, and at least this number are annually slaughtered within the limits of the metropolis. There are slaughtermen who kill for other butchers frequently above a hundred head of cattle, and perhaps five or six hundred sheep every week; many butchers kill for themselves to a considerable extent; and there are few who have not accommodation for slaughtering and dressing a few sheep, either in the cellar underneath their shop, or in the rear of

B

their premises. The business of slaughtering cattle and sheep in London is conducted just in the way most convenient to the butcher, without reference to the convenience and comfort of the public. There are slaughter-houses for sheep within fifty yards of St. Paul's Churchyard, and within a hundred and fifty yards of Ludgate-street, one of the great thoroughfares of London. The fear of creating a nuisance, cognisable as such by the law, is in some measure a substitute for the vigilant inspectorship maintained in the public slaughter-houses on the continent; and those who slaughter cattle know that in proportion as their establishments are cleanly and well ventilated, it is easier to keep the meat in a proper state; but the ignorant, the careless, and those who cannot afford to improve the accommodation and convenience of their slaughter-houses, require to be placed under the restraint of positive regulations. A general police regulation on the subject is thought to be necessary by many persons. In the Report of the Parliamentary Committee on Smithfield Market, to which allusion has already been made, the question of establishing abattoirs in London is noticed. The butchers objected to them on account of the expenses to which they would be put by having to carry the meat to their shops; and they alleged also that the meat would not keep so well in consequence of being removed so soon after being killed. These objections apply in some degree to the present system, under which the great slaughtermen kill for the butchers of a certain district, though the district is certainly much smaller than would be attached to one of several abattoirs.

By 4 & 5 Henry VII. c. 3, butchers were prohibited from killing cattle within the walls of the city of London, on account of "the annoyance of corrupt airs engendered by occasion of blood and other foul things coming by means of slaughter of beasts and scalding of swine." In 1532-3 this act was partially repealed by 24 Hen. VIII. c. 16, the preamble of which recited that since the act 4 & 5 Hen. VII. the butchers of London had made drains to carry off the filth from

their slaughter-houses, and had adopted regulations for avoiding nuisances under the advice of the corporation of the city; and they also alleged that the cost of carrying and re-carrying meat made it dear. It was then enacted that the act aforesaid should not extend to butchers within the city, who may kill within the walls.

ABBEY (from the French Abbaye), a religious community presided over by an abbot or abbess. When the superior was denominated a Prior, the establishment was called a priory; but there was latterly no real distinction between a priory and an abbey. The priories appear to have been all originally off-shoots from certain abbeys, to which they continued for some time to be regarded as subordinate. The wealthiest abbeys, in former times, were in Germany; and of all such foundations in the world the most splendid and powerful was that of Fulda, or Fulden, situated near the town of the same name in Franconia. This monastery, which belonged to the order of St. Benedict, was founded by St. Boniface, in the year 784. Every candidate for admission into the princely brotherhood was required to prove his nobility. The monks themselves elected their abbot from their own number; and that dignitary became, by right of his office, ArchChancellor to the Empress, and PrinceBishop of the diocese of Fulda. He claimed precedence over all the other abbots of Germany. One of the first effects of the Reformation, both in England and in Germany, was the destruction of the religious houses; in England their extinction was complete. [MONAS TERY.]

In the early times of the French mon archy the term abbey was applied to a duchy or earldom, as well as to a religious establishment; and the dukes and counts called themselves abbots, although they remained in all respects secular persons. They took this title in consequence of the possessions of certain abbeys having been conferred upon them by the crown.

ABBOT, the title of the superior of certain establishments of religious persons of the male sex, thence called abbeys.

The word abbot, or abbat, as it has been sometimes written, comes from abbatis, the genitive of abbas, which is the Greek and Latin form of the Syriac abba, of which the original is the Hebrew ab, father. It is, therefore, merely an epithet of respect and reverence, and appears to have been at first applied to any member of the clerical order, just as the French 'père,' and the English father,' which have the same signification, still are in the Roman Catholic church. In the earliest age of monastic institutions, however, the monks were not priests; they were merely holy persons who retired from the world to live in common, and the abbot was that one of their number whom they chose to preside over the association. The general regulations for monasteries, monks, and abbots (Hegumeni) of the Emperor Justinian, in the sixth century, are contained in the Fifth Novel. In regard to general ecclesiastical discipline, all these communities were at this time subject to the bishop of the diocese, and even to the pastor of the parochial district within the bounds of which they were established. At length it began to be usual for the abbot, or, as he was called in the Greek Church, the Archimandrite (that is, the chief monk), or the Hegumenos (that is, the leader), to be in orders; and since the sixth century monks generally have been priests. In point of dignity an abbot is considered to stand next to a bishop; but there have been many abbots in different countries who have claimed almost an equality in rank with the episcopal order. A minute and learned account of the different descriptions of abbots may be found in Du Cange's Glossary, and in Carpentier's Supplement to that work. In England, according to Coke, there used to be twenty-six abbots (Fuller says twenty-seven), and two priors, who were lords of parliament, and sat in the House of Peers. These, sometimes designated Sovereigns, or General abbots, wore the mitre (though not exactly the same in fashion with that of the bishops), carried the crozier (but in their right hands, while the bishops carried theirs in their left), and assumed the episcopal style of lord. Some croziered

abbots, again, were not mitred, and others who were mitred were not croziered. Abbots who presided over establishments that had sent out several branches were styled cardinal-abbots. There were likewise in Germany prince-abbots, as well as prince-bishops. In early times we read of field-abbots (in Latin, Abbates Milites), and abbot-counts (Abba-Comites, or Abbi-Comites). These were secular persons, upon whom the prince had bestowed certain abbeys, for which they were obliged to render military service as for common fiefs. A remnant of this practice appears to have subsisted in our own country long after it had been discontinued on the Continent. Thus, in Scotland, James Stuart, the natural son of James V., more celebrated as the Regent Murray, was, at the time of the Reformation, prior of St. Andrew's, although a secular person. And the secularization of some of the German ecclesiastic dignities has since occasioned something like a renewal of the ancient usage. We have in our day seen a prince of the House of Brunswick (the late Duke of York) at the same time commander-inchief of the British army and Bishop of Osnabrück. The efforts of the abbots to throw off the authority of their diocesans long disturbed the church, and called forth severe denunciations from several of the early councils. Some abbeys, however, obtained special charters, which recognized their independence; a boon which, although acquired at first with the consent of the bishop, was usually defended against his successors with the most jealous punctiliousness. Many of the abbots lived in the enjoyment of great power and state. In ancient times they possessed nearly absolute authority in their monasteries. "Before the time of Charlemagne," says Gibbon," the abbots indulged themselves in mutilating their monks, or putting out their eyes; a punishment much less cruel than the tremendous vade in pace (the subterraneous dungeon or sepulchre), which was afterwards invented." The picture which this writer draws of what he calls “ the abject slavery of the monastic discipline" is very striking. "The actions of a monk, his words, and even his thoughts, were

determined by an inflexible rule, or a capricious superior: the slightest offences were corrected by disgrace or confinement, extraordinary fasts, or bloody flagellation; and disobedience, murmur, or delay, were ranked in the catalogue of the most heinous sins." The external pomp and splendour with which an abbot was in many cases surrounded, corresponded to the extensive authority which he enjoyed within his abbey, and throughout his domains. St. Bernard is thought to refer to the celebrated Luger, abbot of St. Denis, in the beginning of the twelfth century, when he speaks, in one of his writings, of having seen an abbot at the head of more than 600 horsemen, who served him as a cortege. "By the pomp which these dignitaries exhibit," adds the saint, "you would take them, not for superiors of monasteries, but for the lords of castles, not for the directors of consciences, but for the governors of provinces." This illustrates a remark which Gibbon makes in one of his notes:-"I have somewhere heard or read the frank confession of a Benedictine abbot:-My vow of poverty has given me 100,000 crowns a year, my vow of obedience has raised me to the rank of a sovereign prince."" Even in the unreformed parts of the Continent, however, and long before the French Revolution, the powers of the heads of monasteries, as well as those of other ecclesiastical persons, had been reduced to comparatively narrow limits; and the power both of abbots and bishops had been subjected in all material points to the civil authority. The former became merely guardians of the rule of their order, and superintendents of the internal discipline which it prescribed. In France this salutary change was greatly facilitated by the concordat made by Francis I. with Pope Leo X. in 1516, which gave to the king the right of nominating the abbots of nearly every monastery in his dominions. The only exceptions were some of the principal and most ancient houses, which retained the privilege of electing their superiors. The title of abbot has also been borne by the civil authorities in some places, especially among the Genoese, one of whose chief magistrates used to be called the Abbot

of the People. Nor must we forget another application of the term which was once famous in our own and other countries. In many of the French towns there used, of old, to be annually elected from among the burgesses, by the magistrates, an Abbé de Liesse (in Latin, Abbas Lætitiæ), that is, an Abbot of Joy, who acted for the year as a sort of master of the revels, presiding over and directing all their public shows. Among the retainers of some great families in England was an officer of a similar description, styled the Abbot of Misrule; and in Scotland the Abbot of Unreason was, before the Reformation, a personage who acted a principal part in the diversions of the populace, and one of those whom the zeal of the reforming divines was most eager in proscribing.

ABDICATION (from the Latin abdicatio), in general is the act of renouncing and giving up an office by the voluntary act of the party who holds it. The term is now generally applied to the giving up of the kingly office; and in some countries a king can abdicate, in the proper sense of that term, whenever he pleases. But the King of England cannot abdicate, except with the consent of the two Houses of Parliament, in any constitutional form; for a proper abdication would be a divesting himself of his regal powers by his own will, and such an abdication is inconsistent with the nature of his kingly office. It is, however, established by a precedent that he does abdicate, or an abdication may be presumed, if he does acts which are inconsistent with and subversive of that system of government of which he forms a part. In Blackstone's "Commentaries, vol. i. pp. 210-212, and iv. p. 78, mention is made of the resolu tion of both Houses, in 1688, that 'King James II. having endeavoured to subvert the constitution of the kingdom, by breaking the original contract between king and people; and by the advice of Jesuits and other wicked persons, having violated the fundamental laws, and having withdrawn himself out of the kingdom; has abdicated the government, and that the throne is thereby vacant." Thus it appears that the Houses

66

of Lords and Commons assumed the doctrine of an original contract between the king and the people as the foundation of their declaration that James II. had abdicated the throne; and Blackstone, in arguing upon this declaration, assumes, what is contrary to the evidence of history, that the powers of the King of England were originally delegated to him by the nation.

It appears, by the parliamentary debates at that period, that in the conference between the two Houses of Parliament, previous to the passing of the statute which settled the crown upon William III., it was disputed whether the word 'abdicated,' or 'deserted,' should be the term used, to denote in the Journals the conduct of James II. in quitting the country. It was then resolved that the word abdicate' should be used, as including in it the mal-administration of his government. But in coming to this resolution the Houses gave a new meaning to the word.

Among the Romans the term Abdicatio signified generally a rejection or giving up of a thing, and a magistrate was said to abdicate who for any reason gave up his office before the term was expired.

The term Resignation, according to English usage, has a different meaning from abdication; though it is stated that these words are sometimes confounded. [RESIGNATION.]

ABDUCTION (from the Latin word abductio, which is from the verb abducere, to lead or carry off) is an unlawful taking away of the person of another, whether of child, wife, ward, heiress, or women generally.

ABDUCTION of child. [KIDNAPPING.] ABDUCTION of wife may be either by open violence, or by fraud and persuasion, though the law in both cases supposes force and constraint. The remedy given to the husband in such a case is an action, by which he may recover, not the possession of his wife, but damages for taking her away; and also, by statute of 3 Edward I. c. 13, the offender shall be imprisoned for two years, and fined at the pleasure of the king. The husband is also entitled to recover damages against such as persuade and entice the wife to

live separate from him without sufficient cause.

ABDUCTION of ward. A guardian is entitled to an action if his ward be taken from him, but for the damages recovered in such action he must account to his ward when the ward comes of age. This action is now nearly superseded by a more speedy and summary method of redressing all complaints relative to guardians and wards, namely, by application to the Court of Chancery.

ABDUCTION of heiress. By 9 George IV. c. 31, § 19, when any woman shall have any interest, legal or equitable, present or future, in any estate real or personal, or shall be heiress presumptive, or next of kin to any one having such in terest, any person who from motives of lucre shall take or detain her against her will for the purpose of her being marrie or defiled, and all counsellors, aiders and abettors of such offences are declarea guilty of felony, and punishable by transportation for life, or not less than seven years, or imprisonment with or without hard labour. The taking of any unmarried girl under sixteen out of the possession of a parent or guardian is declared a misdemeanor, and is punishable by fine and imprisonment (§ 20). The marriage, when obtained by means of force, may be set aside on that ground. In this case, as in many others, fraud is legally considered as equivalent to force; and, consequently, in a case where both the abduction and marriage were voluntary in fact, they were held in law to be forcible, the consent to both having been obtained by fraud. (See the case of the King v. Edward Gibbon Wakefield.)

ABDUCTION of women generally. The forcible abduction and marriage of women is a felony. Here, and in the case of stealing an heiress, the usual rule that a wife shall not give evidence for or against her husband is departed from, for in such case the woman can with no propriety be reckoned a wife where a main ingredient, her consent, was wanting to the contract of marriage; besides which there is another rule of law, that "a man shall not take advantage of his own wrong," which would obviously be done here, if he who carries off a woman could, by