Age

The length of time a person has lived. Full age or majority is the age at which the law allows persons to do acts or discharge functions which for want of years they were prohibited from doing or undertaking before. As to the age of consent in prosecution for rape, see Rape, as to the age of responsibility see Infant, and see also Parent and Child. In the United States, at twenty-five, a man may be elected a representative in congress; at thirty, a senator; and at thirty-five, he may be chosen president. He is liable to serve in the militia from eighteen to fortyfive inclusive, unless exempted for some particular reason. In England no one can be chosen member of parliament till he has attained twenty-one years; nor be ordained a priest under the age of twenty-four; nor made a bishop till he has completed his thirtieth year. The age of serving in the militia is from sixteen to forty-five years. The law, according to Blackstone, recognizes no minority in the heir to the throne.

See 1 Bla. Com. 224, note, and 2 id.

208, note, where this appears to result from the charter under which the king's oldest son becomes Duke of Cornwall by inheritance. In French Law. A person must have attained the age of forty to be a member of the legislative body; twenty-five, to be a judge of a tribunal de premiere instance; twenty-seven, to be its' president, or to be judge or clerk of a cour royale; thirty, to be its president or procureur-general; twentyfive, to be a justice of the peace; thirty, to be Judge of a tribunal of commerce, and thirtyfive, to be its president; twenty-five, to be a notary public; twenty-one, to be a testamentary witness; thirty, to be a juror. At sixteen, a minor may devise one-half of his property as if he were a major. A male cannot contract marriage till after the eighteenth capable to perform all the acts of civil life; Touillier, Droit Civ. liv.

1, Intr. n. 188.

In Roman Law. Infancy (infantia) extended to the age of seven; the period of childhood (pueritia) which extended from seven to fourteen, was divided into two periods; the first, extending from seven to ten and a half, was called the period nearest childhood (wtas infantia; proxima); the other, from ten and a half to fourteen, the period nearest puberty (wtas pubertati proxima); puberty (pubertas) extended from fourteen to eighteen; full puberty extended from eighteen to twenty-five; at twenty-five, the person was major.

See Taylor, Civ. Law 254; Lecon El. du Droit Civ. 22.

— A witness may prove his own age; Cheever v. Congdon, 34 Mich. 296; State v. Mc Clain, 49 Kan. 730, 31 Pac. 790; Morrel v. Morgan, 65 Cal. 575, 4 Pac. 5S0; State v. Best, 108 N. C. 747, 12 S. E. 907; Hill v. Eldridge, 126 Mass. 234; without giving his sources of information except on cross-examination; Central R. R. v. Coggin, 73 Ga. 689; even if the parent from whom it is admitted that the knowledge was derived is present; Loose v. State, 120 Wis. 115, 97 N. W. 526;

— or is living in the county where suit is brought; Pearce v. Kyzer, 84 Tenn. (16 Lea) 521, 57 Am. Rep. 240; but when the statement was made to a teacher for entry on school registry, that record is not admissible; Simpson v. State, 46 Tex. Cr. R. 551, 81 S. W. 320.

The date of one's birth may be proved by himself or members of his family; Houlton v. Manteuffel, 51 Minn. 185, 53 N. W. 541; Chicago & A. R. Co. v. Lewandowski, 190 111. 301, 60 N. E. 497; but not when the knowledge is acquired from another person, the witness being an orphan; People v. Colbath, 141 Mich. 189, 104 N. W. 633. One's own statement of his age has been said to be the best evidence; Morrison v. Emsley, 53 Mich. 564, 19 N. W. 187. In a trial for rape of a female under sixteen years, her testimony as to her age was held competent; Com. v. Phillips, 162 Mass. 504, 39 N. E. 109; but a conviction for seduction under the age of eighteen could not be maintained when the oral evidence of the girl was contradicted by the church record of her birth on which she had stated her evidence was based; State v. Cougot, 121 Mo. 458, 26 S. W. 566. A statement in a will that testator's daughter was born on a certain day is admissible; 3 To. & Coll. Ex. 82; and in 2 R. & Myl. 169, a person's age was proved by the declarations of a deceased relative. The federal census returns have been held admissible on the question of age; Priddy v. Boice, 201 Mo. 309, 99 S. W. 1055, 9 L. R. A. (N. S.) 718, 119 Am. St. Rep. 762, 9 Ann. Cas. 874; contra, Campbell v. Everhart, 139 N. C. 503, 52 S. E. 201; see Wigm. Ev. 1671; his hook and then stating particulars from recollection has been admitted; Battles v. Tallman, 96 Ala. 403, 11 South. 247: but a school census is inadmissible to prove age for any other than school purposes; Edwards v. Logan, 114 Ky. 312, 70 S. W. 852, 75 S. W. 257. There is no presumption of law that at any age a woman is past the age of child bearing, hut courts have recognized a presumption of fact as to a married woman of l'.)::, years who had never home a child; L. R. 14 Eq. 215; widow of 55%; L. R. 11 Eq. 408; a spinster of 53; 35 L. J. C'h. 303; and the presumption was refused in the case of a woman of 54%, married three years, who had never had a child: 9 Ch. D. 3SS. But in List v. Rodney, 83 Pa. 48::, it was held that (quoting 2 Bla. Corn. 125) "a possihility of issue is always supposed to exist in law... even though the donees be each of them one hundred years old." and that the law would not consider the physical impossihility of a woman's hearing children after she was seventy-five years old.