*
CAMPBELL'S CASE. 235

house ;(i) or the general assembly may, without prejudice, and
for beneficial purposes, lend its aid to supply defects in an agree-
ment which could not be supplied by any judicial proceeding
without the help of such an enactment; although there existed
sufficient evidence of the assent of the party; ( j) or, it may, with-
out injuriously affecting the interests of any one, but for the benefit
of all, authorize a sale, a settlement or the disposition of an estate
to be confirmed or made, which was impracticable, according to the
established rules of law, by reason of the infancy, (k) the cover-
ture, (1) the lunacy, (m) or the alienage (n) of one or more of the
parties concerned; or it may, without prejudice, authorize the
making of leases; (o) or the execution of a power; (p) or the mak-
ing provision for a wife or children; or the selling of estates to pay
debts or the like, (q)

A contract of marriage is, in many respects, so highly important
in its nature as not only to involve the interests and happiness of
the immediate parties, and to require the free consent of a man and
woman who have a perfect bodily (r) and mental capacity to con-
tract; (s) but, it is a contract to which society is a party, and in
which it has a deep interest; and on that account it is, perhaps,
that a marriage, which has been fairly and legally consummated,
cannot be dissolved by a judicial determination, founded on any
subsequent breach of its terms, without the consent of the com-
munity expressed by its representative legislature, or by the supreme
authority of the state. The spiritual court, in England, and some
of the courts of justice of Maryland, have been clothed with
authority to determine on the validity of a contract of marriage;
yet they cannot divorce, from the bonds of matrimony, for any
cause subsequent to the marriage; for, if there has been a valid
marriage, those tribunals are not competent to rescind it; so that a

(i) 1807, ch. 76 and 119.—(J) Kame's Pri. Equi. b. 1, pt. 1, s.4; 2 Sugd. Pow.
97; 1800, ch. 54; 1801, ch. 53 and 96; 1802, ch. 37; 18€5, ch. 68; 1807, ch. 5.—
(k) Blois v. Hereford, 2 Vern. 501; Attorney-General v. Day, 1 Ves. 224; Taylor v.
Philips, 2 Ves. 23; Hearle v. Greenbank, 3 Atk. 712; 1800, ch. 54; 1803, ch. 72
and 90; 1819, ch. 38.—(I) Harvey v. Ashley, 3 Atk. 618; 1802, ch. 8; 1813, ch.
134 and 153; 1818, ch. 58; 1822, ch. 111.—(m) Shelf. Lun. 872; 1784, ch. 1; 1805,
ch. 56; 1809, ch. 41; 1821, ch. 210.—(n) 1800, ch. 68; 1807, ch. 10, 11 and 86.—
(o) 1802, ch. 40.—(p) Hearle v. Greenbank, 1 Ves. 305; 1826, ch. 163; 1827, ch.
73.—-(q) Ridout v. Plymouth, 2 Atk. 105; Buchanan v. Hamilton, 5 Ves, 722; Wal-
Iwyn v. Lee, 9 Ves. 24; Com. Dig. tit. Parliament, H. 5; 1804, ch. 11; 1813, ch.
184; 1815, ch. 151.—(r) Sabell's Case, Dyer, 179;. Bury's Case, 5 Co. 99.—(a) 1
Blac. Coin. 439.