d also protect the pecuniary and other civil rights of
the conjoint who wishes to continue life in common. Here especially we
can recognize the necessity for the separation of property. On the
other hand, I am convinced that it is useless to maintain at any price
a union which one party does not wish for. In practice no good results
from it; it is rather a moral question than a question of law.

In such cases we may observe the despair of the conjoint who has
remained faithful, both in the marital and legal relations of
marriage. The law cannot do everything, and here it is powerless; all
that it can do is to exact delay and attempt at reconciliation, which
sometimes succeeds.

=The Right to Satisfaction of the Sexual Appetite.=--We now come to a
delicate question. The right to satisfy the sexual appetite must
necessarily be restricted in more than one respect if injury to third
parties is to be avoided. If we except certain pathological cases, the
chief difficulty lies in the fact that the normal sexual appetite can
only be satisfied by the cohabitation of two persons, and that what
satisfies the one may often injure or deeply wound the other, and even
the children. The matter may go so far as to concern penal law, and we
shall refer to it again in this connection. But, even from the point
of view of civil law, permission to satisfy the sexual appetite must
necessarily depend on the consent of both parties. In my opinion no
exception to this rule can be tolerated.

It is not enough to protect minors; it is also necessary to prevent
the abuse of the persons of adults against their will. The institution
of so-called Christian marriage still contains barbarous dispositions
in this respect, the wife being generally obliged to surrender herself
to her lord and master as often as he pleases. This is the dark side
of the picture which exacts sexual fidelity in man.

Inversely, for physiological reasons, a very erotic and sexually
exacting woman cannot obtain satisfaction, man being incapable of
commanding erections voluntarily. She can only bring an action for
divorce if she can prove that her husband is completely impotent.

It is sufficient to reflect on these facts to see how difficult is the
regulation of sexual connection by law. The legislation of details in
this domain becomes of necessity an injustice.

We have already considered the great individual variability of the
sexual appetite. Attempts to regulate it by