This Commerce, resulting from the necessities of war, might serve at the same time to establish and to consolidate a more direct and a more active intercourse between the United States and Russia-an intercourse which is less extensive than it might be if proper attention had been bestowed on this subject.

Upon the average number of 3,617 vessels, with a tonnage of 310,502 lasts, that have visited the Russian ports in the Baltic during the three years of 1850, 1851, and 1852, 49 vessels, with a tonnage of 9,814 lasts, were American; that is to say, in the proportion of a little more than one per cent upon the number of vessels, and of three per cent upon tonnage; whereas there have been 1,316 arrivals of English vessels, with a tonnage of 150,420 lasts, which is almost equivalent to half of the tonnage of all the vessels that have entered the Russian ports.

This fact is the more remarkable since, independent of the direct Commerce of Russia with the United States, which is of itself susceptible of being greatly developed, there are many staple productions of the American continent and of the West Indies that could be shipped to Russia in American bottoms instead of being imported to that country, either through the channel of European commercial houses, or under the English flag. We will only cite here some of the principal articles of Commerce imported into Russia, taking the average for the three years of 1850, 1851,

and 1852.

COTTON. The cotton that is used for Russian manufactures is principally imported from America, and still upon the total importation of cotton by sea, which has amounted on the average to 54,313,480 lbs., representing a value of $5,955,371 32, the direct importations from the United States have not exceeded 7,685,440 lbs., or 14 per cent; while England has imported into Russia 43,051,680 lbs., or four-fifths of the quantity.

This article is worthy of the serious attention of American merchants, the more so, because every year it becomes of greater importance in the import trade of Russia, and since this branch of traffic might easily be increased. Russia imports now more than 72,000,000 lbs. of cotton, representing a value of $7,000,000, and this importation might be increased in a few years to double that amount. The following tabular statement will show the rapid progress that the importation of cotton has made since the year 1824

Importation-lbs. 20,980,440

81,205,960

58,161,240

58,428,480

78,398,440

The importation duty is very small, 4 mills per lb., or about 4 per cent. There is no duty levied upon the transit of cotton through Prussia.

SUGAR. Owing to the heavy duties imposed upon raw sugar, $2 per 40 lbs. when imported by sea, Russia imports this produce principally from the Island of Cuba, whose sugar, being of a very superior quality, can best suffer the payment of this high duty. But since the duties upon this article have been reduced for its importation by land, other sugars may enter into competition with great facility. The transit duty upon sugar through Prussia is 20 silver groschen per quintal, or 12 cents per 40 lbs.

If these reduced duties upon sugar, as it is to be presumed, shall be applied at a later period to the importations by sea, the American sugars, owing to their low price, might then compete with advantage with the

Havana sugars.

The prohibition duties upon refined sugar having been abolished for its importation by land, there is also an opening for the competition of American refined sugars, with the exception that they have to pay the transit duty of 12 to 12 cents per 40 lbs. through Prussia. The importations of raw Sugar by sea amount on an average to 75,730,000 lbs., representing a value of $5,085,333 22. The importations from the United States only figure at 2,560,000 lbs., or for little more than 3 per cent, whereas the West India sugars (chiefly those from Havana) amount to 570,000,000 lbs., or to more than three-fourths of the whole.

As we have already remarked, it is only the high tariff duties upon this article that render it difficult for the other sugar-growing countries to compete with the sugars to Cuba.

But American vessels could be freighted for the transportation of Havana sugars with a destination for Russian ports, or to be dispatched, during the effective blockade, to Memel.

COFFEE. Russia imports on an average 9,120,000 lbs. of coffee, representing a value of $1,080,000, and the importations of this article from the United States amount to about 480,000 lbs., or to a little more than 5 per cent. The residue arrives from England and from the Hanseatic cities.

In the importation of this commodity the United States could also take a more active part.

The importation of coffee to Russia by the way of Memel is facilitated by the reduction of the importation duties 784 cents per 40 lb.; which compensates in a great measure for the costs of transportation by land, and for the transit duties of 183 cents per 40 lb. through Prussia.

TOBACCO. Russia imports upon an average more than 7,200,000 lbs. of raw and manufactured tobacco, representing a value of nearly $2,000,000, and although a very considerable quantity of this article is produced upon North American plantations, the direct importations from the United States amount only to 540,000 pounds, or to seven per cent. The greater portion of tobacco comes into Russia from the Hanseatic cities. This branch of Commerce could consequently take a more direct channel, and Havana tobacco could also be shipped to Russia in American bottoms.

FURS. Russia imports yearly on the average about $820,000 worth of furs, without counting those that arrive from Asia. Nearly the half of this importation consists of American martens, in German "schoppen," which are brought to Russia through the intermediate trade with Germany. There are no direct importations of furs from the United States to Russia.

This article might be very profitable to exchange for Russian productions.

Beside the principal articles of transatlantic Commerce that have just been specified, the United States could take a leading part in the Commerce of Russia with European ports. Wines, for instance, form an important article in the importation trade of Russia. The average importation of wines, of which more than half arrive from France, exceeds the sum of $4,666,666 44. As American vessels frequent constantly the

VOL. XXXI.-NO. V.

37

ports of France, they could participate, to a great extent, in the transportation of wines, which are shipped from Havre and Bordeaux.

The importation trade of Russia is particularly favorable to freight. Merchant vessels are always sure of receiving a full return cargo, as the merchandise that is exported from Russia is more bulky than that which is imported into the country. American vessels arriving with home and with West India products, or with merchandise from European ports, could ship in return grain, tallow, hemp, flax, &c., for French or English markets.

England and the Hanseatic cities have the exclusive benefit of this intermediate Commerce, from which they derive very large profits.

Great Britain exports annually to Russia more than $17,000,000 worth of goods of every description, of which hardly two-fifths are productions of her own soil and of her own industry-the balance being composed of foreign or colonial products.

There are a great many other Russian productions besides, that would vastly improve and recover from the prostration into which they have fallen, by direct and active commercial relations with the United States. Such are, for example, hemp, flax, and hemp thread, sail cloths and others, cables, hog bristles, stearine, Russia leather, iron, which is preferred to English iron, copper and copper-ware.

All these articles, which can be procured in Russia at moderate prices and of a superior quality, could be exchanged for American cotton, sugar, tobacco and furs.

The present Commerce of Russia with the United States is very trifling, and much below the level to which is ought to have attained, had a proper direction been given to it.

Upon the total commercial operations of Russia, which on the average have amounted to $132,472,000 yearly, for the triennial period of 1850-51 and '52, of which $65,424,000 were for importations, and $67,048,000 for exportations, the United States represents only $1,508,666 44, or little more than 2 per cent, of which $1,584,666 42 were for importations to Russia, and $1,432,666 44 for exportations from that country.

The following articles appear in the direct Commerce of the United States with Russia :

In order to give a greater extension to this direct Commerce, and in order to promote the interests of the United States in the intermediate Commerce with Russia, which has almost been exclusively carried on by England, it would be very desirable and of paramount utility, if some of

the leading merchants of New York and of Boston would organize some active relations with St. Petersburg and with Riga, by establishing in those cities, as the English have already done, counting houses and agencies, under the direction of active and intelligent correspondents. It is in this way that many English houses have realized very large profits and created immense fortunes.

Art. VII.—THE SEPARATE PROPERTY OF HUSBAND AND WIFE.

FAMILY SETTLEMENTS BY SEPARATE PROPERTY OF MARRIED WOMEN-THE HUSBAND'S COURTESY IN THE PROPERTY OF THE WIFE.

No one can question the utility and justice of the law authorizing a wife to hold real and personal property within the State of New York as her separate estate, relieved of any claim therein on the part of her husband or his creditors. Since the passing of the act of 1848 and its amendments in 1849 on this subject, authorizing any married woman to take by gift, grant, devise, or bequest, from any person other than her husband, and to hold to her sole and separate use, and convey and devise real and personal property, &c., in the same manner and with like effect as if she were unmarried; and of property possessed before marriage, that the same shall continue her sole and separate property as if she were a single female-the vesting of property in wives, by way of family settlements, has been acquiring an increasing and widely extending popularity in New York and some other States.

It is fair to presume that a majority of these estates now held by married women have been derived from the mutual earnings of the husband and wife, or of the husband alone. Nor are such investments to be complained of, when the husband in donating the money to the wife to purchase such estates does not impair his means of fulfilling his prior obligations to his creditors. Of course, all subsequent credits are obtained with notice of the investment, and cannot charge the property of the wife as the ground of confidence on which such credit was obtained. Yet it is a query, when such estates are purchased on credit and the husband unites with his wife in a bond and mortgage for part of the purchase money, whether specialities executed or debts contracted between the making of such mortgage and the time of its payment might not, by special suit in equity against the husband and wife, charge the wife's estate to the amount contributed by the husband towards the payment therefor subsequent to the making of the contract with the plaintiff in such suit. It might be said that the registry of the mortgage was a sufficient notice to the creditor of the husband's intention, and that the new creditor acquiesced in the prior contract of the husband to pay the mortgage on his wife's land; but it could not be known whether the husband or the wife would pay this mortgage; and, if the husband paid it, whether he intended to do so by way of gift or loan. There can be no doubt if the husband, in a state of bankruptcy, invest moneys in lands, and title is taken in the name of the wife, or through such investment the husband becomes bankrupt and unable to pay his subsisting debts, but that equity would charge

the wife's estate, as the debtor of the husband, to the extent of the moneys so contributed in its purchase. Yet if the creditor exchange the notes or evidences of indebtedness, dated prior to the record of such deed, to the debtor's wife, for such as are dated subsequent, he would be presumed to have done so with notice of the investment in the wife, and, so far as his claims were concerned, to have ratified the same.

The extraordinary risks and liabilities of mercantile pursuits in this country induce a careful inquiry with prudent men as to how they can provide for their families in times of prosperity, against the reverses of bankruptcies liable to be brought home to their establishments by so many circumstances beyond a reasonable foresight and beyond their control. The purchase of a homestead and the vesting of its title in the wife, is the most feasible and safe provision; and a husband whose solvency would not thereby be impaired, may do so from the highest considerations of honor and justice. Indeed, such investment might in subsequent reverses enable him to arise from a state of bankruptcy, and it might become a most useful trust for the benefit of his creditors.

But my more immediate object in this article is to inquire as to the effect of the laws authorizing and sustaining these family investments in respect to the rights of the husband in lands so separately held by the wife.

This question came up before Judge Mason, of the Sixth Judicial District of the New York Supreme Court, in 1849, (4 Howard's Practice Reports, 102,) on a suit by a wife to be restored to the enjoyment and management of an estate, partitioned to her as one of the heirs at law of her father in 1828, as against an intemperate husband, the father of her six children, to whom she was married in 1819. The learned Judge first disposes of the point whether the statutes of 1848-9 in question are in conflict with the provision of the Constitution of the United States against the power of State Legislatures to enact laws impairing the obligation of contracts, in coming to the conclusion that marriage is not a contract within the meaning of such provision. If it were, the laws relating to divorce passed by State legislatures would be void; and still the validity of those laws had never been questioned.

Of marriage, he remarks: "That it is wanting in many of the essential ingredients of a contract, and is regulated more upon the grounds of public policy to accomplish the great objects of such a relation than with reference to the pecuniary rights of the parties as it regards each other. The will of society and public policy supersede the will of the parties. And the very creation of this relation dissolves all previous contracts between the parties, and produces a total incapacity to enter into contracts between themselves."

The Judge then proceeds to inquire whether the acts in question were consistent with the provisions of the constitution of the State of New York, which declare that "no member of this State shall be disfranchised or deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any citizen thereof, unless by the law of the land or by the judgment of his peers:" and of section 6th of article 1, declaring "that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law."

The decision of this case, as to the rights of the husband in the wife's lands in question, was no doubt sound. These rights being vested in the land before the passing of the acts, they were saved to the husband by