Bibliography.—Atonement: H. Bushnell,Vicarious Sacrifice(1871); J. McLeod Campbell,Nature of the Atonement(1869); T.J. Crawford,Doctrine of the Holy Spirit respecting the Atonement(1871); R.W. Dale,Atonement(1875); J. Denney,Death of Christ,Atonement and the Modern Mind(1903); A. Lyttelton,Lux Mundi, pp. 201 ff. (Atonement), (1889); R. Moberly,Atonement and Personality; A. Ritschl,Die christliche Lehre van der Rechtfertigung und Versohnung(1870-1874); G.B. Stevens,Christian Doctrine of Salvation(1905).Day of Atonement: articles in Hastings’Bible Dictionary, and in theEncyclopaedia Biblica.
Bibliography.—Atonement: H. Bushnell,Vicarious Sacrifice(1871); J. McLeod Campbell,Nature of the Atonement(1869); T.J. Crawford,Doctrine of the Holy Spirit respecting the Atonement(1871); R.W. Dale,Atonement(1875); J. Denney,Death of Christ,Atonement and the Modern Mind(1903); A. Lyttelton,Lux Mundi, pp. 201 ff. (Atonement), (1889); R. Moberly,Atonement and Personality; A. Ritschl,Die christliche Lehre van der Rechtfertigung und Versohnung(1870-1874); G.B. Stevens,Christian Doctrine of Salvation(1905).
Day of Atonement: articles in Hastings’Bible Dictionary, and in theEncyclopaedia Biblica.
(W. H. Be.)
1Cf. Exodus xii. 15, &c.; Josh. vii. 24 (Achan); Jer. li. 62 (Babylon).22 Sam. xii. 13, 14 (David); Isaiah xl. 2 (Jerusalem): in such cases, however, the context implies repentance.3Ezek. xviii., Micah vi.4Lev. iv. 2, “sin unwittingly,”bishegagā,c.450B.C., &c.5Psalm l. 10, li. 16-19; Isaiah i. 11; Micah vi. 6-8.6Heb.nephesh, also translated “soul.”7Lev. xvi., xxiii. 27-32; Numb. xxix. 7-11.8So Davidson, &c. with LXX. The A.V. with Hebrew text has “seventh day of the month.”9e.g.Achan, Josh. vii. 10-15.102 Sam. xxi. 1-9; Deut. v. 9, 10.11Ezek. xxi. 3, 4.12Isaiah liii.13Isaiah xix. 25, xlix. 6.14Köberle,Sunde und Gnade, pp. 592 ff.15Mark x. 45; Matt. xxvi. 28; 1 Cor. xv. 3; John xi. 48-52; Heb. ii. 9.16Rom. iii. 25.17Rom. v. 8.18Rom. v. 15-19.19Rom. vi. 8.20Rom. iv. 25.21Matt. xxv. 34 f.; Mark viii. 34 ff., ix. 36 f., x. 21.221 John ii. 1, 2, 12, iii. 5, 8, iv. 10.23Heb. ii. 17, ix. 14.24Stevens,Christian Doctrine of Salvation, p. 138.25Ibid.p. 151.26Shedd,Hist. of Christ. Doctr.ii. 385 ff.; cf. van Oosterzee,Christ. Dogmatics, 611.27Shedd ii. 358 f.28Crawford,Scripture Doctrine of the Atonement, pp. 327 ff.29Orr,Ritschlian Theology, pp. 149 ff.30Dale,Atonement, pp. 430 ff.31Pp. 209, 212, 214, 216, 219, 221, 225.
1Cf. Exodus xii. 15, &c.; Josh. vii. 24 (Achan); Jer. li. 62 (Babylon).
22 Sam. xii. 13, 14 (David); Isaiah xl. 2 (Jerusalem): in such cases, however, the context implies repentance.
3Ezek. xviii., Micah vi.
4Lev. iv. 2, “sin unwittingly,”bishegagā,c.450B.C., &c.
5Psalm l. 10, li. 16-19; Isaiah i. 11; Micah vi. 6-8.
6Heb.nephesh, also translated “soul.”
7Lev. xvi., xxiii. 27-32; Numb. xxix. 7-11.
8So Davidson, &c. with LXX. The A.V. with Hebrew text has “seventh day of the month.”
9e.g.Achan, Josh. vii. 10-15.
102 Sam. xxi. 1-9; Deut. v. 9, 10.
11Ezek. xxi. 3, 4.
12Isaiah liii.
13Isaiah xix. 25, xlix. 6.
14Köberle,Sunde und Gnade, pp. 592 ff.
15Mark x. 45; Matt. xxvi. 28; 1 Cor. xv. 3; John xi. 48-52; Heb. ii. 9.
16Rom. iii. 25.
17Rom. v. 8.
18Rom. v. 15-19.
19Rom. vi. 8.
20Rom. iv. 25.
21Matt. xxv. 34 f.; Mark viii. 34 ff., ix. 36 f., x. 21.
221 John ii. 1, 2, 12, iii. 5, 8, iv. 10.
23Heb. ii. 17, ix. 14.
24Stevens,Christian Doctrine of Salvation, p. 138.
25Ibid.p. 151.
26Shedd,Hist. of Christ. Doctr.ii. 385 ff.; cf. van Oosterzee,Christ. Dogmatics, 611.
27Shedd ii. 358 f.
28Crawford,Scripture Doctrine of the Atonement, pp. 327 ff.
29Orr,Ritschlian Theology, pp. 149 ff.
30Dale,Atonement, pp. 430 ff.
31Pp. 209, 212, 214, 216, 219, 221, 225.
ATRATO,a river of western Colombia, South America, rising on the slopes of the Western Cordilleras, in 5° 36′ N. lat., and flowing almost due north to the Gulf of Uraba, or Darien, where it forms a large delta. Its length is about 400 m., but owing to the heavy rainfall of this region it discharges no less than 175,000 cub. ft. of water per second, together with a very large quantity of sediment, which is rapidly filling the gulf. The river is navigable to Quibdo (250 m.), and for the greater part of its course for large vessels, but the bars at its mouth prevent the entrance of sea-going steamers. Flowing through the narrow valley between the Cordillera and coast range, it has only short tributaries, the principal ones being the Truando, Sucio and Murri. The gold and platinum mines of Choco were on some of its affluents, and the river sands are auriferous. The Atrato at one time attracted considerable attention as a feasible route for a trans-isthmian canal, which, it was estimated, could be excavated at a cost of £11,000,000.
ATREK,a river which rises in 37° 10′ N. lat. and 59° E., in the mountains of the north-east of the Persian province of Khorasan, and flows west along the borders of Persia and the Russian Transcaspian province, till it falls, after a course of 350 m., into the south-eastern corner of the Caspian, a short distance north-north-west of Astarabad.
ATREUS,in Greek legend, son of Pelops and Hippodameia, and elder brother of Thyestes. Having murdered his stepbrother Chrysippus, Atreus fled with Thyestes to Mycenae, where he succeeded Eurystheus in the sovereignty. His wife Aërope was seduced by Thyestes, who was driven from Mycenae. To avenge himself, Thyestes sent Pleisthenes (Atreus’ son whom Thyestes had brought up as his own) to kill Atreus, but Pleisthenes was himself slain by his own father. After this Atreus, apparently reconciled to his brother, recalled him to Mycenaeand invited him to a banquet to eat of his son, whom Atreus had slain. Thyestes fled in horror. Subsequently Atreus married the daughter of Thyestes, Pelopia, who had by her own father a son, Aegisthus, who was adopted by Atreus. Thyestes was found by Agamemnon and Menelaus, the sons of Atreus, and imprisoned at Mycenae. Aegisthus being sent to murder Thyestes, mutual recognition took place, and Atreus was slain by the father and son, who seized the throne, and drove Agamemnon and Menelaus out of the country (Thucydides i. 9; Hyginus,Fabulae; Apollodorus). Homer does not speak of the horrors of the story, which are first found in the tragedians; he merely states (Iliad, ii. 105) that Atreus at his death left the kingdom to Thyestes.
See T. Voigt inDissert. philol. Halenses.vi. (1886).
See T. Voigt inDissert. philol. Halenses.vi. (1886).
ATRI,a town of the Abruzzi, Italy, in the province of Teramo, 6 m. W. of the station of that name on the railway from Ancona to Foggia, and 18 m. due E.S.E. of Teramo, on the site of the ancientHadria(q.v.). Pop. (1901) 13,448. Its Gothic cathedral (1285-1305) is remarkably fine; and the interior, though spoilt by restoration in 1657, contains some important frescoes of the end of the 15th century by Andrea di Lecce and his pupils. The crypt was originally a cistern of the Roman period. The palace of the Acquaviva family, who were dukes of Atri from 1398 to 1775, is a massive building situated in the principal square.
ATRIUM(either fromater, black, referring to the blackening of the walls from the smoke of the hearth, or from the Greekαἴθριον, open to the sky, or from an Etruscan town, Atria, where the style of building is supposed to have originated), the principal entrance hall or court of a Roman dwelling, giving access and light to the rooms round it. The centre of the roof over the atrium was open to the sky and called thecompluvium; the rain-water from the roof collected in the gutters was discharged into a marble tank underneath, which was known as theimpluvium. In the early periods of Roman civilization the atrium was the common public apartment, and was used for the reception of visitors and clients, and for ordinary domestic purposes, as cooking and dining. In it were placed the ancestral pictures, the marriage-couch, the hearth and generally a small altar. At a somewhat later period, and among the wealthy, separate apartments were built for kitchens and dining-rooms, and the atrium was kept as a general reception-room for clients and visitors. There were many varieties of the atrium, depending on the way in which the roof was carried. These are described by Vitruvius under the title ofcavaedium.
Other buildings, both consecrated and unconsecrated, were called by the term (corresponding to the English “hall”), such as the Atrium Vestae, where the vestal virgins lived, and the Atrium Libertatis, the residence of the censor, where Asinius Pollio established the first public library at Rome.
The wordatriumin Rome had a second signification, being given to an open court with porticos round, sometimes placed in front of a temple. A similar arrangement was adopted by the early Christians with relation to the Basilica, in front of which there was an open court surrounded by colonnades or arcades. The church of San Clemente at Rome, that of Sant’ Ambrogio at Milan and the cathedral of Parenzo in Istria still retain their atria.
ATROPHY(Gr.ἀ-priv.,τροφἠ, nourishment), a term in medicine used to describe a state of wasting due to some interference with the function of healthy nutrition (seePathology). In the living organism there are always at work changes involving the waste of its component tissues, which render necessary, in order to maintain and preserve life, the supply and proper assimilation of nutritive material. It is also essential for the maintenance of health that a due relation exist between these processes of waste and repair, so that the one may not be in excess of the other. When the appropriation of nutriment exceeds the waste, hypertrophy (q.v.) or increase in bulk of the tissues takes place. When, on the other hand, the supply of nutritive matter is suspended or diminished, or when the power of assimilation is impaired, atrophy or wasting is the result. Thus the whole body becomes atrophied in many diseases; and in old age every part of the frame, with the single exception of the heart, undergoes atrophic change. Atrophy may, however, affect single organs or parts of the body, irrespective of the general state of nutrition, and this may be brought about in a variety of ways. One of the most frequently observed of such instances is atrophy from disuse, or cessation of function. Thus, when a limb is deprived of the natural power of motion, either by paralysis or by painful joint disease, the condition of exercise essential to its nutrition being no longer fulfilled, atrophy of all its textures sooner or later takes place. The brain in imbeciles is frequently observed to be shrivelled, and in many cases of blindness there is atrophy of the optic nerve and optic tract. This form of atrophy is likewise well exemplified in the case of those organs and structures of the body which subserve important ends during foetal life, but which, ceasing to be necessary after birth, undergo a sort of natural atrophy, such as the thymus gland, and certain vessels specially concerned in the foetal circulation. The uterus after parturition undergoes a certain amount of atrophy, and the ovaries, after the child-bearing period, become shrunken. Atrophy of a part may also be caused by interruption to its normal blood-supply, as in the case of the ligature or obstruction of an artery. Again, long-standing disease, by affecting the nutrition of an organ and by inducing the deposit of morbid products, may result in atrophy, as frequently happens in affections of the liver and kidneys. Parts that are subjected to continuous pressure are liable to become atrophied, as is sometimes seen in internal organs which have been pressed upon by tumours or other morbid growths, and is well illustrated in the Chinese practice of foot-binding. Atrophy may manifest itself simply by loss of substance; but, on the other hand, it is often found to co-exist with degenerative changes in the textures affected and the formation of adventitious growth, so that the part may not be reduced in bulk although atrophied as regards its proper structure. Thus, in the case of the heart, when affected with fatty degeneration, there is atrophy of the proper muscular texture, but as this is largely replaced by fatty matter, the organ may undergo no diminution in volume, but may, on the contrary, be increased in size. Atrophy is usually a gradual and slow process, but sometimes it proceeds rapidly. In the disease known by the name ofacute yellow atrophy of the liver, that organ undergoes such rapidly destructive change as results in its shrinking to half, or one-third, of its normal size in the course of a few days. The termprogressive muscular atrophy(synonyms,wastingorcreeping palsy) is applied to an affection of the muscular system, which is characterized by the atrophy and subsequent paralysis of certain muscles, or groups of muscles, and is associated with morbid changes in the anterior roots of the nerves of the spinal cord. This disease begins insidiously, and is often first observed to affect the muscles of one hand, generally the right. The attention of the sufferer is first attracted by the power of the hand becoming weakened, and then there is found to be a wasting of certain of its muscles, particularly those of the ball of the thumb. Gradually other muscles in the arms and legs become affected in a similar manner, their atrophy being attended with a corresponding diminution in power. Although sometimes arrested, this disease tends to progress, until in course of time the greater part of the muscular system is implicated and a fatal result ensues.
ATROPOS,in Greek mythology, the eldest of the three Fates (seeFate). Her name, the “Unalterable” (ἀ-privative, andτρέπειν, to turn), indicates her function, that of rendering the decisions of her sisters irreversible or immutable. Atropos is most frequently represented with scales, a sun-dial or a cutting instrument, the “abhorred shears,” with which she slits the thin-spun thread of life that has been placed on the spindle by Clotho and drawn off by Lachesis.
ATTA, TITUS QUINCTIUS,orQuinticius(d. 77B.C.), Roman comedy writer, was, like Titinius and Afranius, distinguished as a writer offabulae togatae, national comedies. He had the reputation of being a vivid delineator of character, especially female. He also seems to have published a collection of epigrams. The scanty fragments contain many archaisms, but are lively instyle. According to Horace (Epistles, ii 1. 79) the plays of Atta were still put on the stage in his time.
Aulus Gellius vii. 9; fragments in Neukirch,De fabula togata Romanorum(1833); Ribbeck,Comicorum Latinorum reliquiae(1855).
Aulus Gellius vii. 9; fragments in Neukirch,De fabula togata Romanorum(1833); Ribbeck,Comicorum Latinorum reliquiae(1855).
ATTACAPA(Choctaw for “cannibal”), a tribe of North-American Indians, whose home was in south-west Louisiana; they are now practically extinct.
ATTACHMENT,1in law, a process from a court of record, awarded by the justices at their discretion, on a bare suggestion, or on their own knowledge, and properly grantable in cases of contempt. It differs from arrest (q.v.), in that he who arrests a man carries him to a person of higher power to be forthwith disposed of; but he that attaches keeps the party attached, and presents him in court at the day assigned, as appears by the words of the writ. Another difference is, that arrest is only upon the body of a man, whereas an attachment is often upon his goods. It is distinguished from distress in not extending to lands, as the latter does; nor does a distress touch the body, as an attachment does. Every court of record has power to fine and imprison for contempt of its authority. Attachment being merely a process to bring the defendant before the court, is not necessary in cases of contempt in the presence of the court itself. Attachment will be granted in England against peers and members of parliament only for such gross contempts as rescues, disobedience to the sovereign’s writs and the like. Attachment will not lie against a corporation. The county courts in this respect are regulated by acts of 1846 and 1849. They can only punish for contempts committed in presence of the court (seeContempt of Court). Attachments are granted on a rule in the first instance to show cause, which must be personally served before it can be made absolute, except for non-payment of costs on a master’s allocatur, and against a sheriff for not obeying a rule to return a writ or to bring in the body. The offender is then arrested, and when committed will be compelled to answer interrogatories, exhibited against him by the party at whose instance the proceedings have been had; and the examination when taken is referred to the master, who reports thereon, and on the contempt being reported, the court gives judgment according to its discretion, in the same manner as upon a conviction for a misdemeanour at common law. Sir W. Blackstone observes that “this method of making the defendant answer upon oath to a criminal charge is not agreeable to the genius of the common law in any other instance”; and the elasticity of the legal definitions of contempt of court, especially with respect to comments on judicial proceedings, is the subject of much complaint.
Attachment of Debts.—It was suggested by the common law commissioners in 1853 that a remedy analogous to that of Foreign Attachment (see below) might be made available to creditors, after judgment, against debts due to their debtors. Accordingly, the Common Law Procedure Act 1854 enacted that any creditor, having obtained judgment in the superior courts, should have an order that the judgment debtor might be examined as to any debts due and owing to him before a master of the court. The rules and regulations under the Judicature Act 1873 retained the process for attachment of debts as established by the Procedure Act of 1854. On affidavit that the judgment was still unsatisfied, and that any other person within the jurisdiction was indebted to the judgment debtor, the judge was empowered to attach all debts due from such third person (called thegarnishee) to the judgment debtor, to answer the judgment debt. This order binds the debts in the hands of the garnishee, and if he does not dispute his liability execution issues against him at once. If he disputes his liability the question must be tried. Payment by the garnishee or execution against him is a complete discharge as against the judgment debtor. These provisions were, by an order in council of the 18th of November 1867, extended to the county courts. By the Wages Attachment Abolition Act 1870 it is enacted that no order for the attachment of the wages of any servant, labourer or workman shall be made by the judge of any court of record or inferior court, and by the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 it is enacted that the wages of a seaman or apprentice are not subject to attachment.
In the United States attachment of debts is a statutory remedy accorded in most of the states in certain circumstances for the security of creditors, by the seizure by the sheriff of the debtor’s goods or the imposition of a lien upon his land, before judgment, and sometimes at the very commencement of the action. In some states it is only allowed in special cases, as when the debtor has absconded, or is a non-resident or guilty of fraud; in a few it may be had, as of right, at the commencement of ordinary actions. The common-law courts of the United States (by act of Congress) follow the practice in this regard of the state in which they sit. Such attachments (on mesne process) can generally be dissolved by the substitution of a bond with surety. The body can also be attached in most states on civil actions of tort (for a wrongful or negligent act to the damage of another), but not in actions on contract.
Foreign Attachmentis an important custom prevailing in the city of London, whereby a creditor may attach money owing to his debtor, or property belonging to him in the possession of third parties. The person holding the property or owing the money must be within the city at the time of being served with the process, but all persons are entitled to the benefit of the custom. The plaintiff having commenced his action, and made a satisfactory affidavit of his debt, is entitled to issue attachment, which thereupon affects all the money or property of the defendant in the hands of the third party, the garnishee. The garnishee, of course, has as against the attachment all the defences which would be available to him against the defendant, his alleged creditor. The garnishee may plead payment under the attachment, if there has been no fraud or collusion, in bar to an action by the defendant for his debt or property. The court to which this process belongs is the mayor’s court of London, the procedure in which is regulated by the Mayor’s Court of London Procedure Act 1857. This custom, and all proceedings relating thereto, are expressly exempted from the operation of the Debtor’s Act 1869. Similar customs exist in Bristol and a few other towns in England and also in Scotland.
A Writ of Attachmentenforces answers and obedience to decrees and orders of the High Court of Justice, and is made out without order upon an affidavit of the due service of the process, &c., with whose requirements compliance is sought. A corporation, however, is proceeded against by distringas and not by attachment. It was formerly competent to the plaintiff to compel the appearance of a defendant in chancery by attachment, but the usual course was to enter appearance for him in case of default. It is one of the modes of execution allowed for the recovery of property other than land or money.
Attachment of the Forestwas the proceeding in the courts of attachments, Woodmote, or Forty Days’ courts. These courts have fallen into desuetude. They were held before the verderers of the royal forests in different parts of the kingdom once in every forty days, for the purpose of inquiring into all offences against “vert (greensward) and venison.” The attachment was by the bodies of the offenders, if taken in the very act of killing venison, or stealing wood, or preparing so to do, or by fresh and immediate pursuit after the act was done; else they must be attached by their goods. These attachments were received by the verderers and enrolled, and certified under their seals to the Swainmote, or Court of Justice-seat, which was the superior of the forest courts.
1“To attach” is first used in English in the legal sense of arrest or seizure, and the sense of “fasten to” is comparatively late. The Old Frenchatachier, modernattacher, from which the English “attach” is derived, is from a word for a peg or nail, in English “tack,” which is found in many forms in Scandinavian and Celtic languages, and is ultimately connected with the root seen in Latintangere, to touch. The Italianattacare, especially in the phraseattacare battaglia, to join battle, gave the Frenchattaquer, whence the English “attack,” which is therefore by origin a doublet of “attach.”
1“To attach” is first used in English in the legal sense of arrest or seizure, and the sense of “fasten to” is comparatively late. The Old Frenchatachier, modernattacher, from which the English “attach” is derived, is from a word for a peg or nail, in English “tack,” which is found in many forms in Scandinavian and Celtic languages, and is ultimately connected with the root seen in Latintangere, to touch. The Italianattacare, especially in the phraseattacare battaglia, to join battle, gave the Frenchattaquer, whence the English “attack,” which is therefore by origin a doublet of “attach.”
ATTAINDER(from the O. Fr.ataindre, ateindre, to attain,i.e.to strike, accuse, condemn; Lat.attingere, tangere, to touch; the meaning has been greatly affected by the confusion with Fr.taindre, teindre, to taint, stain, Lat.tingere, to dye), in Englishlaw, was the immediate and inseparable consequence from the common law upon the sentence of death. When it was clear beyond all dispute that the criminal was no longer fit to live he was calledattaint, and could not, before the Evidence Act 1843, be a witness in any court. This attainder took place after judgment of death, or upon such circumstances as were equivalent to judgment of death, such as judgment of outlawry on a capital crime, pronounced for absconding from justice. Conviction without judgment was not followed by attainder. The consequences of attainder were (1) forfeiture, (2) corruption of blood. On attainder for treason, the criminal forfeited to the crown his lands, rights of entry on lands, and any interest he might have in lands for his own life or a term of years. For murder, the offender forfeited to the crown the profit of his freeholds during life, and in the case of lands held in fee-simple, the lands themselves for a year and a day; subject to this, the lands escheated to the lord of the fee. These forfeitures related back to the time of the offence committed. Forfeitures of goods and chattels ensued not only on attainder, but on conviction for a felony of any kind, or on flight from justice, and had no relation backwards to the time of the offence committed. Bycorruption of blood, “both upwards and downwards,” the attainted person could neither inherit nor transmit lands. The lands escheated to the lord of the fee, subject to the crown’s right of forfeiture. The doctrine of attainder has, however, ceased to be of much importance. The Forfeiture Act 1870 enacted that henceforth no confession, verdict, inquest, conviction or judgment of or for any treason or felony, orfelo de se, should cause any attainder or corruption of blood, or any forfeiture or escheat. Sentence of death, penal servitude or imprisonment with hard labour for more than twelve months, after conviction for treason or felony, disqualifies from holding or retaining a seat in parliament, public offices under the crown or otherwise, right to vote at elections, &c., and such disability is to remain until the punishment has been suffered or a pardon obtained. Provision was made for the due administration of convicts’ estates, in the interests of themselves and their families. Forfeiture consequent on outlawry was exempted from the provisions of the act. The United States constitution (Art. III. s. 3) says: “The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.”
Bills of Attainder, in English legal procedure, were formerly a parliamentary method of exercising judicial authority. They were ordinarily initiated in the House of Lords and the proceedings were the same as on other bills, but the parties against whom they were brought might appear by counsel and produce witnesses in both Houses. In the case of an impeachment (q.v.), the House of Commons was prosecutor and the House of Lords judge; but such bills beinglegislativein form, the consent of crown, lords and commons was necessary to pass them. Bishops, who do not exercise but who claim the right to vote in cases of impeachment (q.v.), have a right to vote upon bills of attainder, but their vote is not conclusive in passing judgment upon the accused. First passed in 1459, such bills were employed, more particularly during the reigns of the Tudor kings, as a species of extrajudicial procedure, for the direct punishment of political offences. Dispensing with the ordinary judicial forms and precedents, they took away from the accused whatever advantages he might have gained in the courts of law; such evidence only was admitted as might be necessary to secure conviction; indeed, in many cases bills of attainder were passed without any evidence being produced at all. In the reign of Henry VIII. they were much used, through a subservient parliament, to punish those who had incurred the king’s displeasure; many distinguished victims who could not have been charged with any offence under the existing laws being by this means disposed of. In the 17th century, during the disputes with Charles I., the Long Parliament made effective use of the same procedure, forcing the sovereign to give his consent. After the Restoration it became less frequent, though the Jacobite movement in Scotland produced several instances of attainder, without, however, the infliction of the extreme penalty of death. The last bill of attainder passed in England was in the case of Lord Edward Fitzgerald, one of the Irish rebel leaders of 1798.
A bill for reversing attainder took a form contrary to the usual rule. It was first signed by the sovereign and presented by a peer to the House of Lords by command of the crown, then passed through the ordinary stages and on to the commons, to whom the sovereign’s assent was communicated before the first reading was taken, otherwise the whole proceedings were null and void.
ABill of Pains and Penaltiesresembles a bill of attainder in object and procedure, but imposes a lesser punishment than death. The most notable instances of the passing of a bill of pains and penalties are those of Bishop Atterbury in 1722, and of Queen Caroline, wife of George IV., in 1820.
The constitution of the United States declares that “no bill of attainder orex post factolaw shall be passed.”
ATTAINT, WRIT OF,an obsolete method of procedure in English law, for inquiring by a jury of twenty-four whether a false verdict had been given in a trial before an ordinary jury of twelve. If it were found that an erroneous judgment had been given, the wrong was redressed and the original jury incurred infamy, with imprisonment and forfeiture of their goods, which punishments were, however, commuted later for a pecuniary penalty. In criminal cases a writ of attaint was issued at suit of the king, and in civil cases at the suit of either party. In criminal cases it appears to have become obsolete by the end of the 15th century. Procedure by attaint in civil cases had also been gradually giving place to the practice of granting new trials, and after the decision in Bushell’s case in 1670 (seeJury) it became obsolete, and was finally abolished by the Juries Act 1825, except as regards jurors guilty of embracery (q.v.).
ATTALIA,an ancient city of Pamphylia, which derived its name from Attalus II., king of Pergamum; the modern Adalia (q.v.). It was important as the nearest seaport to the rich districts of south-west Phrygia. A much-frequented “half-sea” route led through it to the Lycus and Maeander valleys, and so to Ephesus and Smyrna. This was the natural way from any part of central Asia Minor to Syria and Egypt, and accordingly we hear of Paul and Barnabas taking ship at Attalia for Antioch. Originally the port of Perga, Attalia eclipsed the old Pamphylian capital in early Christian times and became the metropolis. There are extensive remains of the ancient walls, including some portions which go back to the foundation of the Pergamenian city. The most conspicuous monument is the triple Gate of Hadrian, flanked by a tower built by the empress Julia. This lies about half-way round theenceinteand formerly admitted the road from Perga.
ATTAR[orOtto]OF ROSES(Pers.’aṭar, essence), a perfume consisting of essential oil of roses, prepared by distilling, or, in some districts, by macerating the flowers. The manufacture is chiefly carried out in India, Persia and the Balkans; the last named supplying the bulk of the European demand. It is used by perfumery manufacturers as an ingredient. The genuine attar of roses is costly and it is frequently adulterated.
ATTEMPT(Lat.adtemptare, attentare, to try), in law, an act done with intent to commit a crime, and forming one of a series of acts which would constitute its actual commission if it were not interrupted. An attempt must proceed beyond mere preparation, but at the same time it must fall short of the ultimate purpose in any part of it. The actual point, however, at which an act ceases to be an attempt, and becomes criminal, depends upon the circumstances of each particular case. A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit a crime, even if its commission in the manner proposed was impossible. Every attempt to commit a treason, felony or indictable misdemeanour is in itself an indictable misdemeanour, punishable by fine or imprisonment, unless the attempt to commit is specifically punishable by statute as a felony, or in a defined manner as a misdemeanour; and a person who has been indicted for a felony or misdemeanour may,if the evidence so warrants, be found guilty only of the attempt, provided that it too is a misdemeanour.
ATTENTION(from Lat.ad-tendo, await, expect; the condition of being “stretched” or “tense”), in psychology, the concentration of consciousness upon a definite object or objects. The result is brought about, not by effecting any change in the perceptions themselves, but simply by isolating them from other objects. Since all consciousness involves this isolation, attention may be defined generally as the necessary condition of consciousness. Such a definition, however, throws no light upon the nature of the psychological process, which is partly explained by the general law that the greater the number of objects on which attention is concentrated the less will each receive (“pluribus intentus, minor est ad singula sensus”), and conversely. There are also special circumstances which determine the amount of attention,e.g.influences not subject to the will, such as the vividness of the impression (e.g.in the case of a shock), strong change in pleasurable or painful sensations. Secondly, an exercise of volition is employed in fixing the mind upon a definite object. This is a purely voluntary act, which can be strengthened by habit and is variable in different individuals; to it the name “attention” is sometimes restricted. The distinction is expressed by the words “reflex” or “passive,” and “volitional” or “active.” It is important to notice that in every case of attention to an object, there must be in consciousness an implicit apprehension of surrounding objects from which the particular object is isolated. These objects are known as the “psychic fringe,” and are essential to the systematic unity of the attention-process. Attempts have been made to examine the attention-process from the physiological standpoint by investigating the muscular and neural changes which accompany it, and even to assign to it a specific local centre. It has, for example, been remarked that uniformity of environment, resulting in practically automatic activity, produces mental equilibrium and the comparative disappearance of attention-processes; whereas the necessity of adapting activity to abnormal conditions produces a comparatively high degree of attention. In other words, attention is absent where there is uniformity of activity in accordance with uniform, or uniformly changing, environment. In spite of the progress made in this branch of study, it has to be remembered that all psycho-physical experiments are to some extent vitiated by the fact that the phenomena can scarcely remain normal under inspection.
See G.F. Stout,Analytic Psychology(London, 1896), especially part ii. chap. 2; alsoPsychology,Brain, &c.
See G.F. Stout,Analytic Psychology(London, 1896), especially part ii. chap. 2; alsoPsychology,Brain, &c.
ATTERBOM, PER DANIEL AMADEUS(1790-1855), Swedish poet, son of a country parson, was born in the province of Östergötland on the 19th of January 1790. He studied in the university of Upsala from 1805 to 1815, and became professor of philosophy there in 1828. He was the first great poet of the romantic movement which, inaugurated by the critical work of Lorenzo Hammersköld, was to revolutionize Swedish literature. In 1807, when in his seventeenth year, he founded at Upsala an artistic society, called the Aurora League, the members of which included V.F. Palmblad, A.A. Grafström (d. 1870), Samuel Hedborn (d. 1849), and other youths whose names were destined to take a foremost rank in the literature of their generation. Their first newspaper,Polyfem, was a crude effort, soon abandoned, but in 1810 there began to appear a journal,Fosforos, edited by Atterbom, which lasted for three years and finds a place in classic Swedish literature. It consisted entirely of poetry and aesthetico-polemical essays; it introduced the study of the newly arisen Romantic school of Germany, and formed a vehicle for the early works, not of Atterbom only, but of Hammersköld, Dahlgren, Palmblad and others. Later, the members of the Aurora League established thePoetisk Kalender(1812-1822), in which their poems appeared, and a new critical organ,Svensk Litteraturtidning(1813-1824). Among Atterbom’s independent works the most celebrated isLycksalighetens Ö(The Fortunate Island), a romantic drama of extraordinary beauty, published in 1823. Before this he had published a somewhat in the manner of Novalis. Of a dramatized fairy tale,Fågel blå(The Blue Bird), only a fragment, which is among the most exquisite of his writings, is preserved. As a purely lyrical poet he has not been excelled in Sweden, but his more ambitious works are injured by his weakness for allegory and symbolism, and his consistent adoption of the mannerisms of Tieck and Novalis. In his later years he became less violent in literary controversy. He became in 1835 professor of aesthetics and literature at Upsala, and four years later he was admitted to the Swedish Academy. He died on the 21st of July 1855. HisSvenska Siare och Skalder(6 vols., 1841-1855, supplement, 1864) consists of a series of biographies of Swedish poets and men of letters, which forms a valuable history of Swedish letters down to the end of the “classical” period. Atterbom’s works were collected (13 vols., Örebro) in 1854-1870.
ATTERBURY, FRANCIS(1662-1732), English man of letters, politician and bishop, was born in the year 1662, at Milton or Middleton Keynes in Buckinghamshire, a parish of which his father was rector. He was educated at Westminster school and at Christ Church, Oxford, where he became a tutor. In 1682 he published a translation ofAbsalom and Ahithophelinto Latin verse; but neither the style nor the versification was that of the Augustan age. In English composition he succeeded much better. In 1687 he publishedAn Answer to some Considerations on the Spirit of Martin Luther and the Original of the Reformation, a reply to Obadiah Walker, who, elected master of University College in 1676, had printed in a press set up by him there an attack on the Reformation, written by Abraham Woodhead. Atterbury’s treatise, though highly praised by Bishop Burnet, is perhaps more distinguished for the vigour of his rhetoric than for the soundness of his arguments, and the Papists were so much galled by his sarcasms and invectives that they accused him of treason, and of having, by implication, called King James a Judas.
After the Revolution, Atterbury, though bred in the doctrines of non-resistance and passive obedience, readily swore fealty to the new government. He had taken holy orders in 1687, preached occasionally in London with an eloquence which raised his reputation, and was soon appointed one of the royal chaplains. But he ordinarily resided at Oxford, where he was the chief adviser and assistant of Dean Aldrich, under whom Christ Church was a stronghold of Toryism. Thus he became the inspirer of his pupil, Charles Boyle, in the attack (1698) on the Whig scholar, Richard Bentley (q.v.), arising out of Bentley’s impugnment of the genuineness of theEpistles of Phalaris. He was figured by Swift in theBattle of the Booksas the Apollo who directed the fight, and was, no doubt, largely the author of Boyle’s essay. Bentley spent two years in preparing his famous reply, which proved not only that the letters ascribed to Phalaris were spurious, but that all Atterbury’s wit, eloquence and skill in controversial fence was only a cloak for an audacious pretence of scholarship.
Atterbury was soon occupied, however, in a dispute about matters still more important and exciting. The rage of religious factions was extreme. High Church and Low Church divided the nation. The great majority of the clergy were on the High Church side; the majority of King William’s bishops were inclined to latitudinarianism. In 1700 Convocation, of which the lower house was overwhelmingly Tory, had not been suffered to meet for ten years. This produced a lively controversy, into which Atterbury threw himself with characteristic energy, publishing a series of treatises written with much wit, audacity and acrimony. By the mass of the clergy he was regarded as the most intrepid champion that had ever defended their rights against the oligarchy of Erastian prelates. In 1701 he was rewarded with the archdeaconry of Totnes and a prebend in Exeter cathedral. The lower house of Convocation voted him thanks for his services; the university of Oxford created him a doctor of divinity; and in 1704, soon after the accession of Anne, while the Tories still had the chief weight in the government, he was promoted to the deanery of Carlisle.
Soon after he had obtained this preferment the Whig partycame into power. From that party he could expect no favour. Six years elapsed before a change of fortune took place. At length, in the year 1710, the prosecution of Sacheverell produced a formidable explosion of High Church fanaticism. At such a moment Atterbury could not fail to be conspicuous. His inordinate zeal for the body to which he belonged, his turbulent and aspiring temper, his rare talents for agitation and for controversy, were again signally displayed. He bore a chief part in framing that artful and eloquent speech which the accused divine pronounced at the bar of the Lords, and which presents a singular contrast to the absurd and scurrilous sermon which had very unwisely been honoured with impeachment. During the troubled and anxious months which followed the trial, Atterbury was among the most active of those pamphleteers who inflamed the nation against the Whig ministry and the Whig parliament. When the ministry had been changed and the parliament dissolved, rewards were showered upon him. The lower house of Convocation elected him prolocutor, in which capacity he drew up, in 1711, the often-citedRepresentation of the State of Religion; and, in August 1711, the queen, who had selected him as her chief adviser in ecclesiastical matters, appointed him dean of Christ Church on the death of his old friend and patron Aldrich.
At Oxford he was as conspicuous a failure as he had been at Carlisle, and it was said by his enemies that he was made a bishop because he was so bad a dean. Under his administration Christ Church was in confusion, scandalous altercations took place, and there was reason to fear that the great Tory college would be ruined by the tyranny of the great Tory doctor. In 1713 he was removed to the bishopric of Rochester, which was then always united with the deanery of Westminster. Still higher dignities seemed to be before him. For, though there were many able men on the episcopal bench, there was none who equalled or approached him in parliamentary talents. Had his party continued in power it is not improbable that he would have been raised to the archbishopric of Canterbury. The more splendid his prospects the more reason he had to dread the accession of a family which was well known to be partial to the Whigs, and there is every reason to believe that he was one of those politicians who hoped that they might be able, during the life of Anne, to prepare matters in such a way that at her decease there might be little difficulty in setting aside the Act of Settlement and placing the Pretender on the throne. Her sudden death confounded the projects of these conspirators, and, whatever Atterbury’s previous views may have been, he acquiesced in what he could not prevent, took the oaths to the house of Hanover, and did his best to ingratiate himself with the royal family. But his servility was requited with cold contempt; and he became the most factious and pertinacious of all the opponents of the government. In the House of Lords his oratory, lucid, pointed, lively and set off with every grace of pronunciation and of gesture, extorted the attention and admiration even of a hostile majority. Some of the most remarkable protests which appear in the journals of the peers were drawn up by him; and, in some of the bitterest of those pamphlets which called on the English to stand up for their country against the aliens who had come from beyond the seas to oppress and plunder her, critics easily detected his style. When the rebellion of 1715 broke out, he refused to sign the paper in which the bishops of the province of Canterbury declared their attachment to the Protestant succession, and in 1717, after having been long in indirect communication with the exiled family, he began to correspond directly with the Pretender.
In 1721, on the discovery of the plot for the capture of the royal family and the proclamation of King James, Atterbury was arrested with the other chief malcontents, and in 1722 committed to the Tower, where he remained in close confinement during some months. He had carried on his correspondence with the exiled family so cautiously that the circumstantial proofs of his guilt, though sufficient to produce entire moral conviction, were not sufficient to justify legal conviction. He could be reached only by a bill of pains and penalties. Such a bill the Whig party, then decidedly predominant in both Houses, was quite prepared to support, and in due course a bill passed the Commons depriving him of his spiritual dignities, banishing him for life, and forbidding any British subject to hold intercourse with him except by the royal permission. In the Lords the contest was sharp, but the bill finally passed by eighty-three votes to forty-three.
Atterbury took leave of those whom he loved with a dignity and tenderness worthy of a better man, to the last protesting his innocence with a singular disingenuousness. After a short stay at Brussels he went to Paris, and became the leading man among the Jacobite refugees there. He was invited to Rome by the Pretender, but Atterbury felt that a bishop of the Church of England would be out of place at the Vatican, and declined the invitation. During some months, however, he seemed to stand high in the good graces of James. The correspondence between the master and the servant was constant. Atterbury’s merits were warmly acknowledged, his advice was respectfully received, and he was, as Bolingbroke had been before him, the prime minister of a king without a kingdom. He soon, however, perceived that his counsels were disregarded, if not distrusted. His proud spirit was deeply wounded. In 1728 he quitted Paris, fixed his residence at Montpelier, gave up politics, and devoted himself entirely to letters. In the sixth year of his exile he had so severe an illness that his daughter, Mrs Morice, herself very ill, determined to run all risks that she might see him once more. She met him at Toulouse, received the communion from his hand, and died that night.
Atterbury survived the severe shock of his daughter’s death two years. He even returned to Paris and to the service of the Pretender, who had found out that he had not acted wisely in parting with one who, though a heretic, was the most able man of the Jacobite party. In the ninth year of his banishment he published a luminous, temperate and dignified vindication of himself against John Oldmixon, who had accused him of having, in concert with other Christ Church men, garbled the new edition of Clarendon’sHistory of the Rebellion. The charge, as respected Atterbury, had not the slightest foundation; for he was not one of the editors of theHistory, and never saw it till it was printed. A copy of this little work he sent to the Pretender, with a letter singularly eloquent and graceful. It was impossible, the old man said, that he should write anything on such a subject without being reminded of the resemblance between his own fate and that of Clarendon. They were the only two English subjects who had ever been banished from their country and debarred from all communication with their friends by act of parliament. But here the resemblance ended. One of the exiles had been so happy as to bear a chief part in the restoration of the royal house. All that the other could now do was to die asserting the rights of that house to the last. A few weeks after this letter was written Atterbury died, on the 22nd of February 1732. His body was brought to England, and laid, with great privacy, under the nave of Westminster Abbey. No inscription marks his grave.
It is agreeable to turn from Atterbury’s public to his private life. His turbulent spirit, wearied with faction and treason, now and then required repose, and found it in domestic endearments, and in the society of the most illustrious literary men of his time. Of his wife, Katherine Osborn, whom he married while at Oxford, little is known; but between him and his daughter there was an affection singularly close and tender. The gentleness of his manners when he was in the company of a few friends was such as seemed hardly credible to those who knew him only by his writings and speeches. Though Atterbury’s classical attainments were not great, his taste in English literature was excellent; and his admiration of genius was so strong that it overpowered even his political and religious antipathies. His fondness for Milton, the mortal enemy of the Stuarts and of the Church, was such as to many Tories seemed a crime; and he was the close friend of Addison. His favourite companions, however, were, as might have been expected, men whose politics had at least a tinge of Toryism. He lived on friendly terms with Swift, Arbuthnot and Gay. With Prior he had a close intimacy,which some misunderstanding about public affairs at last dissolved. Pope found in Atterbury not only a warm admirer, but a most faithful, fearless and judicious adviser.