AUCKLAND INSTITUTE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XIII, Issue 4669, 31 October 1876, Page 3

AUCKLAND INSTITUTE.

Tub fifth monthly meeting of the subscribers was held last evening,—His Honor Mr. Justice Gillies (president) in the chMr. Donations to the Museum.—Sixty birds' skins, six ruamals, eight fishes, J. Goodall, C.E. ; collection of butterflies, from Fiji, ilev. W. Floyd; large weta and other insects, J. C. Sharland ; carapace and jaws of tortoise, Captain Millar ; ringed water-suake, shells, and native dress, from Solomon Island, a friend ; native dress, waist-belt, eomb, head-dress, fish-hooks, shells, &c., from the Friendly and Marshall Islands, Captain Loverock ; cuttle-fish, frtssa-Bpy of Islands, T. Macffarlane (per (>. Holdßhip) ; Australian tin ore and smelted tin, A. G. Nathan ; minerals from the Bismarck and Tokatea mines, Coromandel, G. Eayner; graphite, from Coromandel, W. Steel; encrustation, from Three Kings cave, E. B. Dickson ; Maori stone adzes and hone, Dr. Maunsell; seed of entada sandens, washed up at Mangawai, Captain Moir; cabinet, Dr. Campbell.

Minutes.—The Secretary read the minutes of the last meeting, which were confirmed. Barbaric Survivals in Marriage.— This paper, read by Dr. Wallis at the last mectiug, stood for discussion by the members.- The President said it might be convenient, as he had something to observe on this paper, that he should make his remarks first. The learned author was to be thanked ) for having brought the subject before the Institute. It appeared to him scarcely correctly entitled. He agreed with the statement that married women do labour under a great many legal disabilities. But it would be found that these disabilities were rather the creations of the canonical laws in time past. There was a good deal more said in these days about woman's rights than woman's duties. But the learned doctor was altogether wrong in his statement about the marriage (according to Roman law) by co-emption and confariation. The fact was that " co-emp-tion" and " confariation," iu the sense used, bad nothing to do with actual marriage. They were legal means for transferring the poteslas over the wife from her family to her husband. Marriage was by consent and cohabitation, and there was necessarily neither co emption nor co-habitation about it. The learned doctor had taken these statements from an article in a number of the Westminster Review, which was extremely incorrect, and accepted the statements as authoritative. (The President quoted from Dr. Ortolan's commentaries upon the Institutes of Justinian in support of this view.) It was untrue that the ring (wedding ring) was a symbol of woman's slavery, a fetter, so to speak. It was always regarded as an ornament. As to the honeymoon having a like signifietion, it was more probable that a sense of delicacy impel newly - married people to go into retirement, where they might do their billing and cooing unobserved. He hoped the learned do at or did not mean to perpetrate a joke when he said that anyone who had experienced one honeymoon would rej gard another as the greatest calamity of his life. He thought that the experience of most married people would prompt them to say that the time was so pleasant they would not object to a repetition of it once a year at least. (Laughter.) It appeared after all that tliere_ was no survival except what was found in human nature, which was moved now as of old by the same passions, motives, and affections.—Mr. Mitford said the married ladies had made no complaint.—Dr. Wallis replied, contending *.W. the address of the learned President rather ' confirmed his view of the subject.' . Lime as a Fertiliser.—Mr. ; Pond oriticised Mr. Hay's paper on this subject with great severity, but taking exception to the chemical data upon which it was based.— Mr. Hay, in reply, said he only wrote the paper from experience, and was guided by well-known authorities in respect to chemical

compositions and combinations.—His said Mr.' Hay V view was from the purely practical aide:'of the question: It might-be ;that the two gentiezaen did not differ so •widely as they thought i "Maori Migrations —Mr. R. C. Bars tow read.a mostiiiteresting paper on this'subject/!' iWe regret that want _of space prevents ub 'giving even an outline of it. - The general purport of the paper seemed to be—l.. That the legend of "'Seven- Cano.es,".. which the Maoris to New. Zealand} must include different dates. 2. That an easterly !wind prevails sometimes for a whole year, which would affect the direction of the imigration. 3. That there is some evidence of New Zealand being peopled at different times. 4, That it is as*- probable that migration might come from the shores of Central America by the Pacific Coast as from-Asia; which theory could be strengthened by - monumental testimony. - 5. That ithe ancestral legends of the Maoris aro, at •least, mythical.—The paper was reserved •for discussion at the next monthly meeting, : which will be held on the 27th of November.