' PARENT AND CHILD. The legal relation between parent and child is one of the incidents or consequences of the relation of husband and wife, and flows out of the con tract of marriage. The legal is to he distinguished from the natural relation, for two persons may be by the law of nature parent and child, while they are not legally or legitimately so. hence a radical distinction exists between natural, or illegitimate, and legitimate children, and their legal rights as against their parents respectively are very different. Legitimate children are the children of two parents who are recognized as married according to the laws of the country in which they are domiciled at the time of the birth; and according to the law of England, if a child is illegitimate at the time of the birth, nothing that can happen afterwards will ever make it legitimate, the maxim being "once illegitimate always illegitimate "—a maxim which, as will be stated, has some exceptions in Scotland. In treating of the laws affecting the mutual relation of parent and child, the laws of England and Ireland, which differ from the law of Scot land in material respects, will first be stated.
1. As to Legitimate Chilaren.—Thege laws relate first to the liability of the parent to maintain the child. and the rights of the child in the event of tire parent's death. As regards the maintenance of the child, it is somewhat singular that, according to the law of England, there is no duty whatever on the parent to support the. child, and con sequently no mode of enforeing such maintenance. The law of nature was probably considered sufficient to supply the motives which urge a parent to support the child, but the municipal law of England has not made this duty compulsory. This defect was to some extent remedied when what is called the poor-law was created by statute in the reign of Elizabeth by which law parents and children are compellable to a certain small extent. but only when having the pecuniary means to do so, to support each other, or rather to help the parish authorities to do so. But apart from the poor-law statutes, there is no legal obligation on the parent to support• the child, nor on the child to support the parent. Hence it follows, that if the child is found in a destitute state, and is taken up, fed, clothed, and saved front starvation by a stranger, such stranger cannot sue the parent for the expense, or any part of it, however necessary to the child's existence. In order to make the father liable for maintenance, there must in all cases be made out against him some contract, express or implied, by which he undertook to pay for such expense; in other words, the mere relationship between the parent and child is not of itself a (*round of liability. But when the child is living in the father's house, it is always field by a jury or court that slight evidence is sufficient of, at least, an implied promise by the father to pay for such expenses. As, for example, if the child orders
clothes or provisions, and the father nee these in use or in process of consmnption, it will he taken that he assented to and adopted the contract, and so will be bound to pay for them. So if a parent put a child to a boarding-school, very slight evidence of a corn met will be held sufficient to fix him whir liability. Nevertheless, in strictness of law, it is as necessary to prove a contract or agreement on the part of the parent to pay for these expenses as it is to fix him with liability in respect of any other matter. When it is said that a parent is not compellable by the common law to maintain his child, it must, at the same time, be observed that if a child is put under the care and domin`lon of an adult person, and the latter willfully nrglect or refuse to feed or maintain such child, whereby the child dies or is injured, such adult will incur the penalties of misdemeanor; hut this offense does not result from the relationship of parent and child, and may arise between an adult and child in any circumstances, as where a child is an apprentice of servant.. The change as to the liability of parents to maintain their children created by the poor• laws amounts merely to this, that if a person is chargeable to the parish, that is, not able to work as well as destitute, and if the overseers or guardians are bound to support him or her, then the parish authorities may reimburse themselves this outlay, or part of it. by obtaining from justices of the peace an order commanding the parent or child of such pauper to pay a certain sum per week towards the relief. This is, however, only compe tent when the relative is able to pay such sum, and in all rases the sum is of necessity very small. Not only parents, lint grand-parents, are liable under the poor-law act to the extent mentioned. Another provision in the poor-law and other kindred acts is, that if a parent runs away and deserts his children, leaving them destitute and a burden on the parish, the overseers are entitled to seize and sell his goods, if any, for the benefit and maintenance of such children; and if the parent, so deserting the children, is able by work or other means to support them, such parent may be committed to prison as a rogue and vagabond. Not only. therefore, is a parent during life not bound to maintain his or her child (with the above exceptions), but also after the parent's death the execu tors or other representatives of the parent, though in possession of funds, are not hound. It. is true that if the parent die intestate, both the real and personal property will go to the children; but the parent is entitled, if he choose, to disinherit the children, and give away all his property to strangers, provided he execute his will in due forts], which he may competently do on death-bed if in possession of his faculties.