Authorities.—E. F. Berlioux,Le Jura(Paris, 1880); F. Machacek,Der Schweizer Jura(Gotha, 1905); A. Magnin,Les lacs du Jura(Paris, 1895); J. Zimmerli, “Die Sprachgrenze im Jura” (vol. i. of hisDie Deutsch-französische Sprachgrenze in der Schweiz(Basel, 1891). For the French slope see Joanne’s largeItinéraireto the Jura, and the smaller volumes relating to the departments of the Ain, Doubs and Jura, in hisGéographies départementales. For the Swiss slope see 3 vols. in the series of theGuides Monod(Geneva); A. Monnier,La Chaux de Fonds et le Haut-Jura Neuchâtelois; J. Monod,Le Jura Bernois; and E. J. P. de la Harpe,Le Jura Vaudois.
Authorities.—E. F. Berlioux,Le Jura(Paris, 1880); F. Machacek,Der Schweizer Jura(Gotha, 1905); A. Magnin,Les lacs du Jura(Paris, 1895); J. Zimmerli, “Die Sprachgrenze im Jura” (vol. i. of hisDie Deutsch-französische Sprachgrenze in der Schweiz(Basel, 1891). For the French slope see Joanne’s largeItinéraireto the Jura, and the smaller volumes relating to the departments of the Ain, Doubs and Jura, in hisGéographies départementales. For the Swiss slope see 3 vols. in the series of theGuides Monod(Geneva); A. Monnier,La Chaux de Fonds et le Haut-Jura Neuchâtelois; J. Monod,Le Jura Bernois; and E. J. P. de la Harpe,Le Jura Vaudois.
(W. A. B. C.)
JURASSIC,in geology, the middle period of the Mesozoic era, that is to say, succeeding the Triassic and preceding the Cretaceous periods. The name Jurassic (Frenchjurassique; GermanJuraformationorJura) was first employed by A. Brongniart and A. von Humboldt for the rocks of this age in the western Jura mountains of Switzerland, where they are well developed. It was in England, however, that they were first studied by William Smith, in whose hands they were made to lay the foundations of stratigraphical geology. The names adopted by him for the subdivisions he traced across the country have passed into universal use, and though some of them are uncouth English provincial names, they are as familiar to the geologists of France, Switzerland and Germany as to those of England. During the following three decades Smith’s work was elaborated by W. D. Conybeare and W. Phillips. The Jurassic rocks of fossils of the European continent were described by d’Orbigny, 1840-1846; by L. von Buch, 1839; by F. A. Quenstedt, 1843-1888; by A. Oppel, 1856-1858; and since then by many other workers: E. Benecke, E. Hébert, W. Waagen, and others. The study of Jurassic rocks has continued to attract the attention of geologists, partly because the bedding is so well defined and regular—the strata are little disturbed anywhere outside the Swiss Jura and the Alps—and partly because the fossils are numerous and usually well-preserved. The result has been that no other system of rocks has been so carefully examined throughout its entire thickness; many “zones” have been established by means of the fossils—principally by ammonites—and these zones are not restricted to limited districts, but many of them hold good over wide areas. Oppel distinguished no fewer than thirty-three zonal horizons, and since then many more sub-zonal divisions have been noted locally.
The existence offaunal regionsin Jurassic times was first pointed out by J. Marcou; later M. Neumayr greatly extended observations in this direction. According to Neumayr, three distinct geographical regions of deposit can be made out among the Jurassic rocks of Europe: (1) The Mediterranean province, embracing the Pyrenees, Alps and Carpathians, with all the tracts lying to the south. One of the biological characters of this area was the great abundance of ammonites belonging tothe groups ofHeterophylli(Phylloceras) andFimbriati(Lytoceras). (2) The central European province, comprising the tracts lying to the north of the Alpine ridge, and marked by the comparative rarity of the ammonites just mentioned, which are replaced by others of the groupsInflati(Aspidoceras) andOppelia, and by abundant reefs and masses of coral. (3) The boreal or Russian province, comprising the middle and north of Russia, Spitzbergen and Greenland. The life in this area was much less varied than in the others, showing that in Jurassic times there was a perceptible diminution of temperature towards the north. The ammonites of the more southern tracts here disappear, together with the corals.
The cause of these faunal regions Neumayr attributed to climatic belts—such as exist to-day—and in part, at least, he was probably correct. It should be borne in mind, however, that although Neumayr was able to trace a broad, warm belt, some 60° in width, right round the earth, with a narrower mild belt to the north and an arctic or boreal belt beyond, and certain indications of a repetition of the climatic zones on the southern side of the thermal equator, more recent discoveries of fossils seem to show that other influences must have been at work in determining their distribution; in short, the identity of the Neumayrian climatic boundaries becomes increasingly obscured by the advance of our knowledge.
The Jurassic period was marked by a great extension of the sea, which commenced after the close of the Trias and reached its maximum during the Callovian and Oxfordian stages; consequently, the Middle Jurassic rocks are much more widely spread than the Lias. In Europe and elsewhere Triassic beds pass gradually up into the Jurassic, so that there is difficulty sometimes in agreement as to the best line for the base of the latter; similarly at the top of thesystemthere is a passage from the Jurassic to the Cretaceous rocks (Alps).
Towards the close of the period elevation began in certain regions; thus, in America, the Sierras, Cascade Mountains, Klamath Mountains, and Humboldt Range probably began to emerge. In England the estuarine Portlandian resulted partly from elevation, but in the Alps marine conditions steadily persisted (in the Tithonian stage). There appears to have been very little crustal disturbance or volcanic activity; tuffs are known in Argentina and California; volcanic rocks of this age occur also in Skye and Mull.
The rocks of the Jurassic system present great petrological diversity. In England the name “Oolites” was given to the middle and higher members of the system on account of the prevalence of oolitic structure in the limestones and ironstones; the same character is a common feature in the rocks of northern Europe and elsewhere, but it must not be overlooked that clays and sandstones together bulk more largely in the aggregate than the oolites. The thickness of Jurassic rocks in England is 4000 to 5000 ft., and in Germany 2000 to 3000 ft. Most of the rocks represent the deposits of shallow seas, but estuarine conditions and land deposits occur as in the Purbeck beds of Dorset and the coals of Yorkshire. Coal is a very important feature among Jurassic rocks, particularly in the Liassic division; it is found in Hungary, where there are twenty-five workable beds; in Persia, Turkestan, Caucasus, south Siberia, China, Japan, Further India, New Zealand and in many of the Pacific Islands.
Being shallow water formations, petrological changes come in rapidly as many of the beds are traced out; sandstones pass laterally into clays, and the latter into limestones, and so on, but a reliable guide to the classification and correlation is found in the fossil contents of the rocks. In the accompanying table a list is given of some of the zonal fossils which regularly occur in the order indicated; other forms are known that are equally useful. It will be noticed that while there is general agreement as to the order in which the zonal forms occur, the line of division between one formation and another is liable to vary according to factors in the personal equation of the authors.
The Jurassic formations stretch across England in a varying band from the mouth of the Tees to the coast of Dorsetshire. They consist of harder sandstones and limestones interstratified with softer clays and shales. Hence they give rise to a characteristic type of scenery—the more durable beds standing out as long ridges, sometimes even with low cliffs, while the clays underlie the level spaces between.
Jurassic rocks cover a vast area in Central Europe. They rise from under the Cretaceous formations in the north-east of France, whence they range southwards down the valleys of the Saône and Rhone to the Mediterranean. They appear as a broken border round the old crystalline nucleus of Auvergne. Eastwards they range through the Jura Mountains up to the high grounds of Bohemia. They appear in the outer chains of the Alps on both sides, and on the south they rise along the centre of the Apennines, and here and there over the Spanish Peninsula. Covered by more recent formations they underlie the great plain of northern Germany, whence they range eastwards and occupy large tracts in central and eastern Russia.Lower Jurassic rocks are absent from much of northern Russia, the stages represented being the Callovian, Oxfordian and Volgian (of Professor S. Nikitin); the fauna differs considerably from that of western Europe, and the marine equivalents of the Purbeck beds are found in this region. In south Russia, the Crimea and Caucasus, Lias and Lower Jurassic rocks are present. In the Alps, the Lower Jurassic rocks are intimately associated with the underlying Triassic formations, and resemble them in consisting largely of reddish limestones and marbles; the ammonites in this region differ in certain respects from those of western and central Europe. The Oxfordian, Callovian, Corallian and Astartian stages are also present. The Upper Jurassic is mainly represented by a uniform series of limestones, with a peculiar and characteristic fauna, to which Oppel gave the name “Tithonian.” This includes most of the horizons from Kimeridgian to Cretaceous; it is developed on the southern flanks of the Alps, Carpathians, Apennines, as well as in south France and other parts of the Mediterranean basin. A characteristic formation on this horizon is the “Diphya limestone,” so-called from the fossilTerebratula diphya(Pygope janitor) seen in the well-known escarpments (Hochgebirge Kalk). Above the Diphya limestone comes the Stramberg limestone (Stramberg in Moravia), with “Aptychus” beds and coral reefs. The rocks of the Mediterranean basin are on the whole more calcareous than those of corresponding age in north-west Europe; thus the Lias is represented by 1500 ft. of white crystalline limestone in Calabria and a similar rock occurs in Sicily, Bosnia, Epirus, Corfu; in Spain the Liassic strata are frequently dolomitic; in the Apennines they are variegated limestones and marls. The Higher Jurassic beds of Portugal show traces of the proximity of land in the abundant plant remains that are found in them. In Scania the Lias succeeds the Rhaetic beds in a regular manner, and Jurassic rocks have been traced northward well within the polar circle; they are known in the Lofoten Isles, Spitzbergen, east Greenland, King Charles’s Island, Cape Stewart in Scoresby Sound, Grinnell Land, Prince Patrick Land, Bathurst and Exmouth Island; in many cases the fossils denote a climate considerably milder than now obtains in these latitudes.In the American continent Jurassic rocks are not well developed. Marine Lower and Middle Jurassic beds occur on the Pacific coast (California and Oregon), and in Wyoming, the Dakotas, Colorado, east Mexico and Texas. Above the marine beds in the interior are brackish and fresh-water deposits, the Morrison and Como beds (Atlantosaurus and Baptanodon beds of Marsh). Later Jurassic rocks are found in northern British Columbia and perhaps in Alaska, Wyoming, Utah, Montana, Colorado, the Dakotas, &c. In California some of thegold-bearing, metamorphic slates are of this age. Marine Jurassic rocks have not been clearly identified on the Atlantic side of America. The Patuxent and Arundel formations (non-marine) are doubtfully referred to this period. Lower and Middle Jurassic formations occur in Argentina and Bolivia. Jurassic rocks have been recognized in Asia, including India, Afghanistan, Persia, Kurdistan, Asia Minor, the Caspian region, Japan and Borneo. The best marine development is in Cutch, where the following groups are distinguished from above downwards: the Umia series = Portlandian and Tithonian of south Europe, passing upwards into the Neocomian; the Katrol series = Oxfordian (part) and Kimeridgian; the Chari series = Callovian and part of the Oxfordian; the Patcham series = Bathonian. In the western half of the Salt Range and the Himalayas, Spiti shales are the equivalents of the European Callovian and Kimeridgian. The upper part of the Gondwana series is not improbably Jurassic. On the African continent, Liassic strata are found in Algeria, and Bathonian formations occur in Abyssinia, Somaliland, Cape Colony and western Madagascar. In Australia the Permo-Carboniferous formations are succeeded in Queensland and Western Australia by what may be termed the Jura-Trias, which include the coal-bearing “Ipswich” and “Burrum” formations of Queensland. In New Zealand there is a thick series of marine beds with terrestrial plants, the Mataura series in the upper part of Hutton’s Hokanui system. Sir J. Hector included also the Putakaka series (as Middle Jurassic) and the Flag series with the Catlin’s River and Bastion series below. Jurassic rocks have been recorded from New Guinea and New Caledonia.1Purbeckianfrom the “Isle” of Purbeck.Aquilonienfrom Aquilo (Nord).Bononienfrom Bononia (Boulogne).VirgulienfromExogyra virgula.PteroceranfromPteroceras oceani.AstartienfromAstarte supracorollina.Rauracienfrom Rauracia (Jura).Argovienfrom Argovie (Switzerland).Neuvizienfrom Neuvizy (Ardennes).Divesienfrom Dives (Calvados).Bathonienfrom Bath (England).Bajocienfrom Bayeux (Calvados).Toarcienfrom Toarcium (Tours).Charmouthienfrom Charmouth (England).Sinemourienfrom Sinemurum, Semur (Côte d’Or).Hettangienfrom Hettange (Lorraine).Life in the Jurassic Period.—The expansion of the sea during this period, with the formation of broad sheets of shallow and probably warmish water, appears to have been favourable to many forms of marine life. Under these conditions several groups of organisms developed rapidly along new directions, so that the Jurassic period as a whole came to have a fauna differing clearly and distinctly from the preceding Palaeozoic or succeeding Tertiary faunas. In the seas, all the main groups were represented as they are to-day.Corals were abundant, and in later portions of the period covered large areas in Europe; the modern type of coral became dominant; besides reef-building forms such asThamnastrea,Isastrea,Thecosmilia, there were numerous single forms likeMontivaltia. Crinoids existed in great numbers in some of the shallow seas; compared with Palaeozoic forms there is a marked reduction in the size of the calyx with a great extension in the number of arms and pinnules;Pentacrinus,Eugeniacrinus,Apiocrinusare all well known; Antedon was a stalkless genus. Echinoids (urchins) were gradually developing the so-called “irregular” type,Echinobrissus,Holectypus,Collyrites,Clypeus, but the “regular” forms prevailed,Cidaris,Hemicidaris,Acrosalenia. Sponges were important rock-builders in Upper Jurassic times (Spongiten Kalk); they include lithistids such asCnemediastrum,Hyalotragus,Peronidella; hexactinellids,Tremadictyon,Craticularia; and horny sponges have been found in the Lias and Middle Jurassic.Polyzoa are found abundantly in some of the beds,Stomatopora,Berenicia, &c. Brachiopods were represented principally by terebratulids (Terebratula,Waldheimia,Megerlea), and by rhynchonellids;Thecae,LingulaandCraniawere also present. The Palaeozoic spirifirids and athyrids still lingered into the Lias. More important than the brachiopods were the pelecypods;Ostrea,Exogyra,Gryphaeawere very abundant (Gryphite limestone, Gryphite grit); the genusTrigonia, now restricted to Australian waters, was present in great variety;Aucella,Lima,Pecten,PseudomonotisGervillia,Astarte,Diceras,Isocardia,Pleuromyamay be mentioned out of many others. Amongst the gasteropods thePleurotomariidaeandTurbinidaereached their maximum development; the PalaeozoicConularialived to see the beginning of this period (Pleurotomaria,Nerinea,Pteroceras,Cerithium,Turritella).Cephalopods flourished everywhere; first in importance were the ammonites; the Triassic generaPhyllocerasandLytoceraswere still found in the Jurassic waters, but all the other numerous genera were new, and their shells are found with every variation of size and ornamentation. Some are characteristic of the older Jurassic rocks,Arietites,Aegoceras,Amaltheus,Harpoceras,Oxynoticeras,Stepheoceras, and the two genera mentioned above; in the middle stages are foundCosmoceras,Perisphinctes,Cardioceras,Kepplerites Aspidoceras; in the upper stagesOlcostephanus,Perisphinctes,Reineckia,Oppelia. So regularly do certain forms characterize definite horizons in the rocks that some thirty zones have been distinguished in Europe, and many of them can be traced even as far as India. Another cephalopod group, the belemnites, that had been dimly outlined in the preceding Trias, now advanced rapidly in numbers and in variety of form, and they, like the ammonites, have proved of great value as zone-indicators. The Sepioids or cuttlefish made their first appearance in this period (Beloteuthis,Geoteuthis,) and their ink-bags can still be traced in examples from the Lias and lithographic limestone. Nautiloids existed but they were somewhat rare.A great change had come over the crustaceans; in place of the Palaeozoic trilobites we find long-tailed lobster-like forms,Penaeus,Eryon,Magila, and the broad crab-like type first appeared inProsopon. Isopods were represented byArchaeoniscusand others. Insects have left fairly abundant remains in the Lias of England, Schambelen (Switzerland) and Dobbertin (Mecklenburg), and also in the English Purbeck. Neuropterous forms predominate, but hemiptera occur from the Lias upwards; the earliest known flies (Diptera) and ants (Hymenoptera) appeared; orthoptera, cockroaches, crickets, beetles, &c., are found in the Lias, Stonesfield slate and Purbeck beds.Fishes were approaching the modern forms during this period, heterocercal ganoids becoming scarce (theCoelacanthidaereached their maximum development), while the homocercal forms were abundant (Gyrodus,Microdon,Lepidosteus,Lepidotus,Dapedius). The Chimaeridae, sea-cats, made their appearance (Squaloraja). The ancestors of the modern sturgeons, garpikes and selachians,Hybodus,Acroduswere numerous. Bony-fish were represented by the smallLeptolepis.So important a place was occupied by reptiles during this period that it has been well described as the “age of reptiles.” In the seas the fish-shaped Ichthyosaurs and long-necked Plesiosaurs dwelt in great numbers and reached their maximum development; the latter ranged in size from 6 to 40 ft. in length. The Pterosaurs, with bat-like wings and pneumatic bones and keeled breast-bone, flew over the land;Pterodactylwith short tail andRhamphorhyncuswith long tail are the best known. Curiously modified crocodilians appeared late in the period (Mystriosaurus,Geosaurus,Steneosaurus,Teleosaurus). But even more striking than any of the above were the Dinosaurs; these ranged in size from a creature no larger than a rabbit up to the giganticAtlantosaurus, 100 ft. long, in the Jurassic of Wyoming. Both herbivorous and carnivorous forms were present;Brontosaurus,Megalosaurus,Stegosaurus,Cetiosaurus,Diplodocus,CeratosaurusandCampsognathusare a few of the genera. By comparison with the Dinosaurs the mammals took a very subordinate position in Jurassic times; only a few jaws have been found, belonging to quite small creatures; they appear to have been marsupials and were probably insectivorous (PlagiaulaxBolodon,Triconodon,Phascolotherium,Stylacodon). Of great interest are the remains of the earliest known bird (Archaeopteryx) from the Solenhofen slates of Bavaria. Although this was a great advance beyond the Pterodactyls in avian characters, yet many reptilian features were retained.Comparatively little change took place in the vegetation in the time that elapsed between the close of the Triassic and the middle of the Jurassic periods. Cycads,Zamites,Podozamites, &c., appeared to reach their maximum; Equisetums were still found growing to a great size and Ginkgos occupied a prominent place; ferns were common; so too were pines, yews, cypresses and other conifers, which while they outwardly resembled their modern representatives, were quite distinct in species. No flowering plants had yet appeared, although a primitive form of angiosperm has been reported from the Upper Jurassic of Portugal.The economic products of the Jurassic system are of considerable importance; the valuable coals have already been noticed; the well-known iron ores of the Cleveland district in Yorkshire and those of the Northampton sands occur respectively in the Lias and Inferior Oolites. Oil shales are found in Germany, and several of the Jurassic formations in England contain some petroleum. Building stones of great value are obtained from the Great Oolite, the Portlandian and the Inferior Oolite; large quantities of hydraulic cement and lime have been made from the Lias. The celebrated lithographic stone of Solenhofen in Bavaria belongs to the upper portion of this system.See D’Orbigny,Paléontologie française,Terrain Jurassique(1840, 1846); L. von Buch, “Über den Jura in Deutschland” (Abhand. d. Berlin Akad., 1839); F. A. Quenstedt,Flötzgebirge Württembergs(1843) and other papers, alsoDer Jura(1883-1888); A. Oppel,Die Juraformation Englands, Frankreichs und s.w. Deutschlands(1856-1858). For a good general account of the formations with many references to original papers, see A. de Lapparent,Traité de géologie, vol. ii. 5th ed. (1906). The standard work for Great Britain is the series ofMemoirs of the Geological SurveyentitledThe Jurassic Rocks of Britain, i and ii. “Yorkshire” (1892); iii. “The Lias of England and Wales” (1893); iv. “The Lower Oolite Rocks of England (Yorkshire excepted)” (1894); v. “The Middle and Upper Oolitic Rocks of England (Yorkshire excepted)” (1895). The map is after that of M. Neumayr, “Die geographische Verbreitung der Juraformation,”Denkschr. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss., Wien, Math. u. Naturwiss., cl. L.,Abth.i,Karte1. (1885).
Jurassic rocks cover a vast area in Central Europe. They rise from under the Cretaceous formations in the north-east of France, whence they range southwards down the valleys of the Saône and Rhone to the Mediterranean. They appear as a broken border round the old crystalline nucleus of Auvergne. Eastwards they range through the Jura Mountains up to the high grounds of Bohemia. They appear in the outer chains of the Alps on both sides, and on the south they rise along the centre of the Apennines, and here and there over the Spanish Peninsula. Covered by more recent formations they underlie the great plain of northern Germany, whence they range eastwards and occupy large tracts in central and eastern Russia.
Lower Jurassic rocks are absent from much of northern Russia, the stages represented being the Callovian, Oxfordian and Volgian (of Professor S. Nikitin); the fauna differs considerably from that of western Europe, and the marine equivalents of the Purbeck beds are found in this region. In south Russia, the Crimea and Caucasus, Lias and Lower Jurassic rocks are present. In the Alps, the Lower Jurassic rocks are intimately associated with the underlying Triassic formations, and resemble them in consisting largely of reddish limestones and marbles; the ammonites in this region differ in certain respects from those of western and central Europe. The Oxfordian, Callovian, Corallian and Astartian stages are also present. The Upper Jurassic is mainly represented by a uniform series of limestones, with a peculiar and characteristic fauna, to which Oppel gave the name “Tithonian.” This includes most of the horizons from Kimeridgian to Cretaceous; it is developed on the southern flanks of the Alps, Carpathians, Apennines, as well as in south France and other parts of the Mediterranean basin. A characteristic formation on this horizon is the “Diphya limestone,” so-called from the fossilTerebratula diphya(Pygope janitor) seen in the well-known escarpments (Hochgebirge Kalk). Above the Diphya limestone comes the Stramberg limestone (Stramberg in Moravia), with “Aptychus” beds and coral reefs. The rocks of the Mediterranean basin are on the whole more calcareous than those of corresponding age in north-west Europe; thus the Lias is represented by 1500 ft. of white crystalline limestone in Calabria and a similar rock occurs in Sicily, Bosnia, Epirus, Corfu; in Spain the Liassic strata are frequently dolomitic; in the Apennines they are variegated limestones and marls. The Higher Jurassic beds of Portugal show traces of the proximity of land in the abundant plant remains that are found in them. In Scania the Lias succeeds the Rhaetic beds in a regular manner, and Jurassic rocks have been traced northward well within the polar circle; they are known in the Lofoten Isles, Spitzbergen, east Greenland, King Charles’s Island, Cape Stewart in Scoresby Sound, Grinnell Land, Prince Patrick Land, Bathurst and Exmouth Island; in many cases the fossils denote a climate considerably milder than now obtains in these latitudes.
In the American continent Jurassic rocks are not well developed. Marine Lower and Middle Jurassic beds occur on the Pacific coast (California and Oregon), and in Wyoming, the Dakotas, Colorado, east Mexico and Texas. Above the marine beds in the interior are brackish and fresh-water deposits, the Morrison and Como beds (Atlantosaurus and Baptanodon beds of Marsh). Later Jurassic rocks are found in northern British Columbia and perhaps in Alaska, Wyoming, Utah, Montana, Colorado, the Dakotas, &c. In California some of thegold-bearing, metamorphic slates are of this age. Marine Jurassic rocks have not been clearly identified on the Atlantic side of America. The Patuxent and Arundel formations (non-marine) are doubtfully referred to this period. Lower and Middle Jurassic formations occur in Argentina and Bolivia. Jurassic rocks have been recognized in Asia, including India, Afghanistan, Persia, Kurdistan, Asia Minor, the Caspian region, Japan and Borneo. The best marine development is in Cutch, where the following groups are distinguished from above downwards: the Umia series = Portlandian and Tithonian of south Europe, passing upwards into the Neocomian; the Katrol series = Oxfordian (part) and Kimeridgian; the Chari series = Callovian and part of the Oxfordian; the Patcham series = Bathonian. In the western half of the Salt Range and the Himalayas, Spiti shales are the equivalents of the European Callovian and Kimeridgian. The upper part of the Gondwana series is not improbably Jurassic. On the African continent, Liassic strata are found in Algeria, and Bathonian formations occur in Abyssinia, Somaliland, Cape Colony and western Madagascar. In Australia the Permo-Carboniferous formations are succeeded in Queensland and Western Australia by what may be termed the Jura-Trias, which include the coal-bearing “Ipswich” and “Burrum” formations of Queensland. In New Zealand there is a thick series of marine beds with terrestrial plants, the Mataura series in the upper part of Hutton’s Hokanui system. Sir J. Hector included also the Putakaka series (as Middle Jurassic) and the Flag series with the Catlin’s River and Bastion series below. Jurassic rocks have been recorded from New Guinea and New Caledonia.
1Purbeckianfrom the “Isle” of Purbeck.Aquilonienfrom Aquilo (Nord).Bononienfrom Bononia (Boulogne).VirgulienfromExogyra virgula.PteroceranfromPteroceras oceani.AstartienfromAstarte supracorollina.Rauracienfrom Rauracia (Jura).Argovienfrom Argovie (Switzerland).Neuvizienfrom Neuvizy (Ardennes).Divesienfrom Dives (Calvados).Bathonienfrom Bath (England).Bajocienfrom Bayeux (Calvados).Toarcienfrom Toarcium (Tours).Charmouthienfrom Charmouth (England).Sinemourienfrom Sinemurum, Semur (Côte d’Or).Hettangienfrom Hettange (Lorraine).
1Purbeckianfrom the “Isle” of Purbeck.Aquilonienfrom Aquilo (Nord).Bononienfrom Bononia (Boulogne).VirgulienfromExogyra virgula.PteroceranfromPteroceras oceani.AstartienfromAstarte supracorollina.Rauracienfrom Rauracia (Jura).Argovienfrom Argovie (Switzerland).Neuvizienfrom Neuvizy (Ardennes).Divesienfrom Dives (Calvados).Bathonienfrom Bath (England).Bajocienfrom Bayeux (Calvados).Toarcienfrom Toarcium (Tours).Charmouthienfrom Charmouth (England).Sinemourienfrom Sinemurum, Semur (Côte d’Or).Hettangienfrom Hettange (Lorraine).
Life in the Jurassic Period.—The expansion of the sea during this period, with the formation of broad sheets of shallow and probably warmish water, appears to have been favourable to many forms of marine life. Under these conditions several groups of organisms developed rapidly along new directions, so that the Jurassic period as a whole came to have a fauna differing clearly and distinctly from the preceding Palaeozoic or succeeding Tertiary faunas. In the seas, all the main groups were represented as they are to-day.Corals were abundant, and in later portions of the period covered large areas in Europe; the modern type of coral became dominant; besides reef-building forms such asThamnastrea,Isastrea,Thecosmilia, there were numerous single forms likeMontivaltia. Crinoids existed in great numbers in some of the shallow seas; compared with Palaeozoic forms there is a marked reduction in the size of the calyx with a great extension in the number of arms and pinnules;Pentacrinus,Eugeniacrinus,Apiocrinusare all well known; Antedon was a stalkless genus. Echinoids (urchins) were gradually developing the so-called “irregular” type,Echinobrissus,Holectypus,Collyrites,Clypeus, but the “regular” forms prevailed,Cidaris,Hemicidaris,Acrosalenia. Sponges were important rock-builders in Upper Jurassic times (Spongiten Kalk); they include lithistids such asCnemediastrum,Hyalotragus,Peronidella; hexactinellids,Tremadictyon,Craticularia; and horny sponges have been found in the Lias and Middle Jurassic.
Polyzoa are found abundantly in some of the beds,Stomatopora,Berenicia, &c. Brachiopods were represented principally by terebratulids (Terebratula,Waldheimia,Megerlea), and by rhynchonellids;Thecae,LingulaandCraniawere also present. The Palaeozoic spirifirids and athyrids still lingered into the Lias. More important than the brachiopods were the pelecypods;Ostrea,Exogyra,Gryphaeawere very abundant (Gryphite limestone, Gryphite grit); the genusTrigonia, now restricted to Australian waters, was present in great variety;Aucella,Lima,Pecten,PseudomonotisGervillia,Astarte,Diceras,Isocardia,Pleuromyamay be mentioned out of many others. Amongst the gasteropods thePleurotomariidaeandTurbinidaereached their maximum development; the PalaeozoicConularialived to see the beginning of this period (Pleurotomaria,Nerinea,Pteroceras,Cerithium,Turritella).
Cephalopods flourished everywhere; first in importance were the ammonites; the Triassic generaPhyllocerasandLytoceraswere still found in the Jurassic waters, but all the other numerous genera were new, and their shells are found with every variation of size and ornamentation. Some are characteristic of the older Jurassic rocks,Arietites,Aegoceras,Amaltheus,Harpoceras,Oxynoticeras,Stepheoceras, and the two genera mentioned above; in the middle stages are foundCosmoceras,Perisphinctes,Cardioceras,Kepplerites Aspidoceras; in the upper stagesOlcostephanus,Perisphinctes,Reineckia,Oppelia. So regularly do certain forms characterize definite horizons in the rocks that some thirty zones have been distinguished in Europe, and many of them can be traced even as far as India. Another cephalopod group, the belemnites, that had been dimly outlined in the preceding Trias, now advanced rapidly in numbers and in variety of form, and they, like the ammonites, have proved of great value as zone-indicators. The Sepioids or cuttlefish made their first appearance in this period (Beloteuthis,Geoteuthis,) and their ink-bags can still be traced in examples from the Lias and lithographic limestone. Nautiloids existed but they were somewhat rare.
A great change had come over the crustaceans; in place of the Palaeozoic trilobites we find long-tailed lobster-like forms,Penaeus,Eryon,Magila, and the broad crab-like type first appeared inProsopon. Isopods were represented byArchaeoniscusand others. Insects have left fairly abundant remains in the Lias of England, Schambelen (Switzerland) and Dobbertin (Mecklenburg), and also in the English Purbeck. Neuropterous forms predominate, but hemiptera occur from the Lias upwards; the earliest known flies (Diptera) and ants (Hymenoptera) appeared; orthoptera, cockroaches, crickets, beetles, &c., are found in the Lias, Stonesfield slate and Purbeck beds.
Fishes were approaching the modern forms during this period, heterocercal ganoids becoming scarce (theCoelacanthidaereached their maximum development), while the homocercal forms were abundant (Gyrodus,Microdon,Lepidosteus,Lepidotus,Dapedius). The Chimaeridae, sea-cats, made their appearance (Squaloraja). The ancestors of the modern sturgeons, garpikes and selachians,Hybodus,Acroduswere numerous. Bony-fish were represented by the smallLeptolepis.
So important a place was occupied by reptiles during this period that it has been well described as the “age of reptiles.” In the seas the fish-shaped Ichthyosaurs and long-necked Plesiosaurs dwelt in great numbers and reached their maximum development; the latter ranged in size from 6 to 40 ft. in length. The Pterosaurs, with bat-like wings and pneumatic bones and keeled breast-bone, flew over the land;Pterodactylwith short tail andRhamphorhyncuswith long tail are the best known. Curiously modified crocodilians appeared late in the period (Mystriosaurus,Geosaurus,Steneosaurus,Teleosaurus). But even more striking than any of the above were the Dinosaurs; these ranged in size from a creature no larger than a rabbit up to the giganticAtlantosaurus, 100 ft. long, in the Jurassic of Wyoming. Both herbivorous and carnivorous forms were present;Brontosaurus,Megalosaurus,Stegosaurus,Cetiosaurus,Diplodocus,CeratosaurusandCampsognathusare a few of the genera. By comparison with the Dinosaurs the mammals took a very subordinate position in Jurassic times; only a few jaws have been found, belonging to quite small creatures; they appear to have been marsupials and were probably insectivorous (PlagiaulaxBolodon,Triconodon,Phascolotherium,Stylacodon). Of great interest are the remains of the earliest known bird (Archaeopteryx) from the Solenhofen slates of Bavaria. Although this was a great advance beyond the Pterodactyls in avian characters, yet many reptilian features were retained.
Comparatively little change took place in the vegetation in the time that elapsed between the close of the Triassic and the middle of the Jurassic periods. Cycads,Zamites,Podozamites, &c., appeared to reach their maximum; Equisetums were still found growing to a great size and Ginkgos occupied a prominent place; ferns were common; so too were pines, yews, cypresses and other conifers, which while they outwardly resembled their modern representatives, were quite distinct in species. No flowering plants had yet appeared, although a primitive form of angiosperm has been reported from the Upper Jurassic of Portugal.
The economic products of the Jurassic system are of considerable importance; the valuable coals have already been noticed; the well-known iron ores of the Cleveland district in Yorkshire and those of the Northampton sands occur respectively in the Lias and Inferior Oolites. Oil shales are found in Germany, and several of the Jurassic formations in England contain some petroleum. Building stones of great value are obtained from the Great Oolite, the Portlandian and the Inferior Oolite; large quantities of hydraulic cement and lime have been made from the Lias. The celebrated lithographic stone of Solenhofen in Bavaria belongs to the upper portion of this system.
See D’Orbigny,Paléontologie française,Terrain Jurassique(1840, 1846); L. von Buch, “Über den Jura in Deutschland” (Abhand. d. Berlin Akad., 1839); F. A. Quenstedt,Flötzgebirge Württembergs(1843) and other papers, alsoDer Jura(1883-1888); A. Oppel,Die Juraformation Englands, Frankreichs und s.w. Deutschlands(1856-1858). For a good general account of the formations with many references to original papers, see A. de Lapparent,Traité de géologie, vol. ii. 5th ed. (1906). The standard work for Great Britain is the series ofMemoirs of the Geological SurveyentitledThe Jurassic Rocks of Britain, i and ii. “Yorkshire” (1892); iii. “The Lias of England and Wales” (1893); iv. “The Lower Oolite Rocks of England (Yorkshire excepted)” (1894); v. “The Middle and Upper Oolitic Rocks of England (Yorkshire excepted)” (1895). The map is after that of M. Neumayr, “Die geographische Verbreitung der Juraformation,”Denkschr. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss., Wien, Math. u. Naturwiss., cl. L.,Abth.i,Karte1. (1885).
(J. A. H.)
JURAT(through Fr. from med. Lat.juratus, one sworn, Lat.jurare, to swear), a name given to the sworn holders of certain offices. Under theancien régimein France, in several towns, of the south-west, such as Rochelle and Bordeaux, thejuratswere members of the municipal body. The title was also borne by officials, corresponding to aldermen, in the Cinque Ports, but is now chiefly used as a title of office in the Channel Islands. There are two bodies, consisting each of twelve jurats, for Jersey and the bailiwick of Guernsey respectively. They are elected for life, in Jersey by the ratepayers, in Guernsey by the elective states. They form, with the bailiff as presiding judge, the royal court of justice, and are a constituent part of the legislative bodies. In English law, the word jurat (juratum) is applied to that part of an affidavit which contains the names of the parties swearing the affidavit and the person before whom it was sworn, the date, place and other necessary particulars.
JURIEN DE LA GRAVIÈRE, JEAN BAPTISTE EDMOND(1812-1892), French admiral, son of Admiral Jurien, who served through the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars and was a peer of France under Louis Philippe, was born on the 19th of November 1812. He entered the navy in 1828, was made a commander in 1841, and captain in 1850. During the Russian War he commanded a ship in the Black Sea. He was promoted to be rear-admiral on the 1st of December 1855, and appointed to the command of a squadron in the Adriatic in 1859, when he absolutely sealed the Austrian ports with a close blockade. In October 1861 he was appointed to command the squadron in the Gulf of Mexico, and two months later the expedition against Mexico. On the 15th of January 1862 he was promoted to be vice-admiral. During the Franco-German War of 1870 he had command of the French Mediterranean fleet, and in 1871 he was appointed “director of charts.” As having commanded in chief before the enemy, the age-limit was waived in his favour, and he was continued on the active list. Jurien died on the 4th of March 1892. He was a voluminous author of works on naval history and biography, most of which first appeared in theRevue des deux mondes. Among the most noteworthy of these areGuerres maritimes sous la république et l’empire, which was translated by Lord Dunsany under the title ofSketches of the Last Naval War(1848);Souvenirs d’un amiral(1860), that is, of his father,Admiral Jurien;La Marine d’autrefois(1865), largely autobiographical; andLa Marine d’aujourd’hui(1872). In 1866 he was elected a member of the Academy.
JURIEU, PIERRE(1637-1713), French Protestant divine, was born at Mer, in Orléanais, where his father was a Protestant pastor. He studied at Saumur and Sedan under his grandfather, Pierre Dumoulin, and under Leblanc de Beaulieu. After completing his studies in Holland and England, Jurieu received Anglican ordination; returning to France he was ordained again and succeeded his father as pastor of the church at Mer. Soon after this he published his first work,Examen de livre de la réunion du Christianisme(1671). In 1674 hisTraité de la dévotionled to his appointment as professor of theology and Hebrew at Sedan, where he soon became also pastor. A year later he published hisApologie pour la morale des Réformés. He obtained a high reputation, but his work was impaired by his controversial temper, which frequently developed into an irritated fanaticism, though he was always entirely sincere. He was called by his adversaries “the Goliath of the Protestants.” On the suppression of the academy of Sedan in 1681, Jurieu received an invitation to a church at Rouen, but, afraid to remain in France on account of his forthcoming work,La Politique du clergé de France, he went to Holland and was pastor of the Walloon church of Rotterdam till his death on the 11th of January 1713. He was also professor at the école illustre. Jurieu did much to help those who suffered by the revocation of the Edict of Nantes (1685). He himself turned for consolation to the Apocalypse, and succeeded in persuading himself (Accomplissement des prophéties, 1686) that the overthrow of Antichrist (i.e.the papal church) would take place in 1689. H. M. Baird says that “this persuasion, however fanciful the grounds on which it was based, exercised no small influence in forwarding the success of the designs of William of Orange in the invasion of England.” Jurieu defended the doctrines of Protestantism with great ability against the attacks of Antoine Arnauld, Pierre Nicole and Bossuet, but was equally ready to enter into dispute with his fellow Protestant divines (with Louis Du Moulin and Claude Payon, for instance) when their opinions differed from his own even on minor matters. The bitterness and persistency of his attacks on his colleague Pierre Bayle led to the latter being deprived of his chair in 1693.
One of Jurieu’s chief works isLettres pastorales adressées aux fidèles de France(3 vols., Rotterdam, 1686-1687; Eng. trans., 1689), which, notwithstanding the vigilance of the police, found its way into France and produced a deep impression on the Protestant population. His last important work was theHistoire critique des dogmes et des cultes(1704; Eng. trans., 1715). He wrote a great number of controversial works.See the article in Herzog-Hauck,Realencyklopädie; also H. M. Baird,The Huguenots and the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes(1895).
One of Jurieu’s chief works isLettres pastorales adressées aux fidèles de France(3 vols., Rotterdam, 1686-1687; Eng. trans., 1689), which, notwithstanding the vigilance of the police, found its way into France and produced a deep impression on the Protestant population. His last important work was theHistoire critique des dogmes et des cultes(1704; Eng. trans., 1715). He wrote a great number of controversial works.
See the article in Herzog-Hauck,Realencyklopädie; also H. M. Baird,The Huguenots and the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes(1895).
JURIS,a tribe of South American Indians, formerly occupying the country between the rivers Iça (lower Putumayo) and Japura, north-western Brazil. In ancient days they were the most powerful tribe of the district, but in 1820 their numbers did not exceed 2000. Owing to inter-marrying, the Juris are believed to have been extinct for half a century. They were closely related to the Passēs, and were like them a fair-skinned, finely built people with quite European features.
JURISDICTION,in general, the exercise of lawful authority, especially by a court or a judge; and so the extent or limits within which such authority is exercisable. Thus each court has its appropriate jurisdiction; in the High Court of Justice in England administration actions are brought in the chancery division, salvage actions in the admiralty, &c. The jurisdiction of a particular court is often limited by statute, as that of a county court, which is local and is also limited in amount. In international law jurisdiction has a wider meaning, namely, the rights exercisable by a state within the bounds of a given space. This is frequently referred to as the territorial theory of jurisdiction. (SeeInternational Law;International Law, Private.)
JURISPRUDENCE(Lat.jurisprudentia, knowledge of law, fromjus, right, andprudentia, fromprovidere, to foresee), the general term for “the formal science of positive law” (T. E. Holland); seeLaw. The essential principles involved are discussed below and inJurisprudence, Comparative; the details of particular laws or sorts of law (Contract, &c.) and of individual national systems of law (English Law, &c.) being dealt with in separate articles.
The human race may be conceived as parcelled out into a number of distinct groups or societies, differing greatly in size and circumstances, in physical and moral characteristics of all kinds. But they all resemble each other in that they reveal on examination certain rules of conduct in accordance with which the relations of the membersinter seare governed. Each society has its own system of laws, and all the systems, so far as they are known, constitute the appropriate subject matter of jurisprudence. The jurist may deal with it in the following ways. He may first of all examine the leading conceptions common to all the systems, or in other words define the leading terms common to them all. Such are the termslawitself,right,duty,property,crime, and so forth, which, or their equivalents, may, notwithstanding delicate differences of connotation, be regarded as common terms in all systems. That kind of inquiry is known in England as analytical jurisprudence. It regards the conceptions with which it deals as fixed or stationary, and aims at expressing them distinctly and exhibiting their logical relations with each other. What is really meant by a right and by a duty, and what is the true connexion between a right and a duty, are types of the questions proper to this inquiry. Shifting our point of view, but still regarding systems of law in the mass, we may consider them, not as stationary, but as changeable and changing, we may ask what general features are exhibited by the record of the change. This, somewhat crudely put, may serve to indicate the field of historical or comparative jurisprudence. In its ideal condition it would require an accurate record of the history of all legal systems as its material. But whether the material be abundant or scanty the method is the same. It seeks the explanation of institutions and legal principles in the facts of history. Its aim is to show how a given rule came to be what it is. The legislative source—the emanation of the rule from a sovereign authority—is of no importance here; what is important is the moral source—the connexion of the rule with the ideas prevalent during contemporary periods. This method, it is evident, involves not only a comparison of successive stages in the history of the same system, but a comparison of different systems, of the Roman with the English, of the Hindu with the Irish, and so on. The historical method as applied to law may be regarded as a special example of the method of comparison. The comparative method is really employed in all generalizations about law; for, although the analysis of legal terms might be conducted with exclusive reference to one system, the advantage of testing the result by reference to other systems is obvious. But, besides the use of comparison for purposes of analysis and in tracing the phenomena of the growth of laws, it is evident that for the purposes of practical legislation the comparison of different systems may yield important results. Laws are contrivances for bringing about certain definite ends, the larger of which are identical in all systems. The comparison of these contrivances not only serves to bring their real object, often obscured as it is in details, into clearer view, but enables legislators to see where the contrivances are deficient, and how they may be improved.
The “science of law,” as the expression is generally used, means the examination of laws in general in one or other of the ways just indicated. It means an investigation of laws which exist or have existed in some given society in fact—in other words, positive laws; and it means an examination not limited to the exposition of particular systems. Analytical jurisprudence is in England associated chiefly with the name of John Austin (q.v.), whoseProvince of Jurisprudence Determinedsystematized and completed the work begun in England by Hobbes, and continued at a later date and from a different point of view by Bentham.
Austin’s first position is to distinguish between laws properly so called and laws improperly so called. In any of the older writers on law, we find the various senses in which the word isused grouped together as variations of one common meaning. Thus Blackstone advances to his proper subject, municipal laws, through (1) the laws of inanimate matter, (2) the laws of animal nutrition, digestion, &c., (3) the laws of nature, which are rules imposed by God on men and discoverable by reason alone, and (4) the revealed or divine law which is part of the law of nature directly expounded by God. All of these are connected by this common element that they are “rules of action dictated by some superior being.” And some such generalization as this is to be found at the basis of most treatises on jurisprudence which have not been composed under the influence of the analytical school. Austin disposes of it by the distinction that some of those laws are commands, while others are not commands. The so-called laws of nature are not commands; they are uniformities which resemble commands only in so far as they may be supposed to have been ordered by some intelligent being. But they are not commands in the only proper sense of that word—they are not addressed to reasonable beings, who may or may not will obedience to them. Laws of nature are not addressed to anybody, and there is no possible question of obedience or disobedience to them. Austin accordingly pronounces them laws improperly so called, and confines his attention to laws properly so called, which are commands addressed by a human superior to a human inferior.
This distinction seems so simple and obvious that the energy and even bitterness with which Austin insists upon it now seem superfluous. But the indiscriminate identification of everything to which common speech gives the name of a law was, and still is, a fruitful source of confusion. Blackstone’s statement that when God “put matter into motion He established certain laws of motion, to which all movable matter must conform,” and that in those creatures that have neither the power to think nor to will such laws must be invariably obeyed, so long as the creature itself subsists, for its existence depends on that obedience, imputes to the law of gravitation in respect of both its origin and its execution the qualities of an act of parliament. On the other hand the qualities of the law of gravitation are imputed to certain legal principles which, under the name of the law of nature, are asserted to be binding all over the globe, so that “no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this.” Austin never fails to stigmatize the use of “natural laws” in the sense of scientific facts as improper, or as metaphorical.
Having eliminated metaphorical or figurative laws, we restrict ourselves to those laws which are commands. This word is the key to the analysis of law, and accordingly a large portion of Austin’s work is occupied with the determination of its meaning. Acommandis an order issued by a superior to an inferior. It is a signification of desire distinguished by this peculiarity that “the party to whom it is directed is liable to evil from the other, in case he comply not with the desire.” “If you are able and willing to harm me in case I comply not with your wish, the expression of your wish amounts to a command.” Being liable to evil in case I comply not with the wish which you signify, I amboundor obliged by it, or I lie under adutyto obey it. The evil is called asanction, and the command or duty is said to besanctionedby the chance of incurring the evil. The three termscommand,dutyandsanctionare thus inseparably connected. As Austin expresses it in the language of formal logic, “each of the three terms signifies the same notion, but eachdenotesa different part of that notion andconnotesthe residue.”
All commands, however, are not laws. That term is reserved for those commands which oblige generally to the performance of acts of a class. A command to your servant to rise at such an hour on such a morning is a particular command, but not a law or rule; a command to rise always at that hour is a law or rule. Of this distinction it is sufficient to say in the meantime that it involves, when we come to deal with positive laws, the rejection of particular enactments to which by inveterate usage the term law would certainly be applied. On the other hand it is not, according to Austin, necessary that a true law should bind persons as a class. Obligations imposed on the grantee of an office specially created by parliament would imply a law; a general order to go into mourning addressed to the whole nation for a particular occasion would not be a law.
So far we have arrived at a definition of laws properly so called. Austin holds superiority and inferiority to be necessarily implied in command, and such statements as that “laws emanate from superiors” to be the merest tautology and trifling. Elsewhere he sums up the characteristics of true laws as ascertained by the analysis thus: (1) laws, being commands, emanate from a determinate source; (2) every sanction is an evil annexed to a command; and (3) every duty implies a command, and chiefly means obnoxiousness to the evils annexed to commands.
Of true laws, those only are the subject of jurisprudence which are laws strictly so called, or positive laws. Austin accordingly proceeds to distinguish positive from other true laws, which are either laws set by God to men or laws set by men to men, not, however, as political superiors nor in pursuance of a legal right. The discussion of the first of these true but not positive laws leads Austin to his celebrated discussion of the utilitarian theory. The laws set by God are either revealed or unrevealed,i.e.either expressed in direct command, or made known to men in one or other of the ways denoted by such phrases as the “light of nature,” “natural reason,” “dictates of nature,” and so forth. Austin maintains that the principle of general utility, based ultimately on the assumed benevolence of God, is the true index to such of His commands as He has not chosen to reveal. Austin’s exposition of the meaning of the principle is a most valuable contribution to moral science, though he rests its claims ultimately on a basis which many of its supporters would disavow. And the whole discussion is now generally condemned as lying outside the proper scope of the treatise, although the reason for so condemning it is not always correctly stated. It is found in such assumptions of fact as that there is a God, that He has issued commands to men in what Austin calls the “truths of revelation,” that He designs the happiness of all His creatures, that there is a predominance of good in the order of the world—which do not now command universal assent. It is impossible to place these propositions on the same scientific footing as the assumptions of fact with reference to human society on which jurisprudence rests. If the “divine laws” were facts like acts of parliament, it is conceived that the discussion of their characteristics would not be out of place in a scheme of jurisprudence.
The second set of laws properly so called, which are not positive laws, consists of three classes: (1) those which are set by men living in a state of nature; (2) those which are set by sovereigns but not as political superiors,e.g.when one sovereign commands another to act according to a principle of international law; and (3) those set by subjects but not in pursuance of legal rights. This group, to which Austin gives the name of positive morality, helps to explain his conception of positive law. Men are living in a state of nature, or a state of anarchy, when they are not living in a state of government or as members of a political society. “Political society” thus becomes the central fact of the theory, and some of the objections that have been urged against it arise from its being applied to conditions of life in which Austin would not have admitted the existence of a political society. Again, the third set in the group is intimately connected with positive laws on the one hand and rules of positive morality which are not even laws properly so called on the other. Thus laws set by subjects in consequence of a legal right are clothed with legal sanctions, and are laws positive. A law set by guardian to ward, in pursuance of a right which the guardian is bound to exercise, is a positive law pure and simple; a law set by master to slave, in pursuance of a legal right, which he is not bound to exercise, is, in Austin’s phraseology, to be regarded both as a positive moral rule and as a positive law.1On the other hand the rules set by a club or society, and enforced upon its members by exclusion from the society, but not in pursuance of any legal right, are laws, but not positive laws. They are imperative and proceed froma determinate source, but they have no legal or political sanction. Closely connected with this positive morality, consisting of true but not positive laws, is the positive morality whose rules are not laws properly so called at all, though they are generally denominated laws. Such are the laws of honour, the laws of fashion, and, most important of all, international law.
Nowhere does Austin’s phraseology come more bluntly into conflict with common usage than in pronouncing the law of nations (which in substance is a compact body of well-defined rules resembling nothing so much as the ordinary rules of law) to be not laws at all, even in the wider sense of the term. That the rules of a private club should be law properly so called, while the whole mass of international jurisprudence is mere opinion, shocks our sense of the proprieties of expression. Yet no man was more careful than Austin to observe these properties. He recognizes fully the futility of definitions which involve a painful struggle with the current of ordinary speech. But in the present instance the apparent paralogism cannot be avoided if we accept the limitation of laws properly so called to commands proceeding from a determinate source. And that limitation is so generally present in our conception of law that to ignore it would be a worse anomaly than this. No one finds fault with the statement that the so-called code of honour or the dictates of fashion are not, properly speaking, laws. We repel the same statement applied to the law of nature, because it resembles in so many of its most striking features—in the certainty of a large portion of it, in its terminology, in its substantial principles—the most universal elements of actual systems of law, and because, moreover, the assumption that brought it into existence was nothing else than this, that it consisted of those abiding portions of legal systems which prevail everywhere by their own authority. But, though “positive morality” may not be the best phrase to describe such a code of rules, the distinction insisted on by Austin is unimpeachable.
The elimination of those laws properly and improperly so called which are not positive laws brings us to the definition of positive law, which is the keystone of the system. Every positive law is “set by a sovereign person, or sovereign body of persons, to a member or members of the independent political society wherein that person or body is sovereign or superior.” Though possibly sprung directly from another source, it is a positive law, by the institution of that present sovereign in the character of a political superior. The question is not as to the historical origin of the principle, but as to its present authority. “The legislator is he, not by whose authority the law was first made, but by whose authority it continues to be law.” This definition involves the analysis of the connected expressionssovereignty,subjectionandindependent political society, and ofdeterminate body—which last analysis Austin performs in connexion with that of commands. These are all excellent examples of the logical method of which he was so great a master. The broad results alone need be noticed here. In order that a given society may form a society political and independent, thegenerality or bulkof its members must be in ahabitof obedience to a certain and common superior; whilst that certain person or body of persons must not behabituallyobedient to a certain person or body. All the italicized words point to circumstances in which it might be difficult to say whether a given society is political and independent or not. Several of these Austin has discussed—e.g.the state of things in which a political society yields obedience which may or may not be called habitual to some external power, and the state of things in which a political society is divided between contending claimants for sovereign power, and it is uncertain which shall prevail, and over how much of the society. So long as that uncertainty remains we have a state ofanarchy. Further, an independent society to be political must not fall below a number which can only be called considerable. Neither then in a state of anarchy, nor in inconsiderable communities, nor among men living in a state of nature, have we the proper phenomena of a political society. The last limitation goes some way to meet the most serious criticism to which Austin’s system has been exposed, and it ought to be stated in his own words. He supposes a society which may be styled independent, which is considerable in numbers, and which is in a savage or extremely barbarous condition. In such a society, “the bulk of its members is not in the habit of obedience to one and the same superior. For the purpose of attacking an external enemy, or for the purpose of repelling an attack, the bulk of its members who are capable of bearing arms submits to one leader or one body of leaders. But as soon as that emergency passes the transient submission ceases, and the society reverts to the state which may be deemed its ordinary state. The bulk of each of the families which compose the given society renders habitual obedience to its own peculiar chief, but those domestic societies are themselves independent societies, or are not united and compacted into one political society by habitual and general obedience to one common superior, and there is no law (simply or strictly so styled) which can be called the law of that society. The so-called laws which are common to the bulk of the community are purely and properly customary laws—that is to say, laws which are set or imposed by the general opinion of the community, but are not enforced by legal or political sanctions.” Such, he says, are the savage societies of hunters and fishers in North America, and such were the Germans as described by Tacitus. He takes no account of societies in an intermediate stage between this and the condition which constitutes political society.
We need not follow the analysis in detail. Much ingenuity is displayed in grouping the various kinds of government, in detecting the sovereign authority under the disguises which it wears in the complicated state system of the United States or under the fictions of English law, in elucidating the precise meaning of abstract political terms. Incidentally the source of many celebrated fallacies in political thought is laid bare. That the question who is sovereign in a given state is a question of fact and not of law or morals or religion, that the sovereign is incapable of legal limitation, that law is such by the sovereign’s command, that no real or assumed compact can limit his action—are positions which Austin has been accused of enforcing with needless iteration. He cleared them, however, from the air of paradox with which they had been previously encumbered, and his influence was in no direction more widely felt than in making them the commonplaces of educated opinion in this generation.
Passing from these, we may now consider what has been said against the theory, which may be summed up in the following terms. Laws, no matter in what form they be expressed, are in the last resort reducible to commands set by the person or body of persons who are in fact sovereigns in any independent political society. The sovereign is the person or persons whose commands are habitually obeyed by the great bulk of the community; and by an independent society we mean that such sovereign head is not himself habitually obedient to any other determinate body of persons. The society must be sufficiently numerous to be considerable before we can speak of it as a political society. From command, with its inseparable incident of sanction, come the duties and rights in terms of which laws are for the most part expressed. Duty means that the person of whom it is predicated is liable to the sanction in case he fails to obey the command. Right means that the person of whom it is predicated may set the sanction in operation in case the command be disobeyed.