a 
Inaugural Address. XXIx 
period, and by succeeding monarchs, these were considered 
as unnecessary formalities, and rejected. They, then, enacted 
laws in their own names, and alone—the style of persuasion, 
which was used in the earlier edicts, was changed for the 
imperative declaration of an absolute Legislator, ‘* voulons, 
‘€ commandons et ordonnons, car tel est notre plaisir,’ and 
for the deliberative voice of the council, was substituted the 
practice of verifying and enregistering the royal ordinances 
in the Parliaments or Sovereign Courts of those Jurisdictions 
to which the King thought proper to extend them ; a prac- 
tice which was continued, without deviation, until it became 
a fundamental maxim in French Jurisprudence, recognised, 
equally, by the Prince and by the People, that no Law could 
be published in any other manner, and that no ordinance 
could have any effect, or bind the inhabitants of avy parti- 
cular Jurisdiction, before it was verified and enregistered, 
by the King’s order, in the Sovereign tribunal of that Juris- 
diction.(1) Under the sanction ofthis maxim, the Parlia- 
ments of France, at various times, refused to verify and en- 
register particular ordinances which they conceived to be 
oppressive tothe subject, orsubversive of the constitution, 
with a spirit and constancy which reflected the highest hon- 
or on their members, but bore no proportion to the power 
which they opposed.—In some instances of their opposition, 
the King voluntarily abandoned the obnoxious Law ; in 
others, the Parliament, on their part, thought it most pru- 
dent to submit, and obeyed the royal commands, contenting 
themselves with an entry, purporting that the enregistry was 
made by compulsion, ‘* ex ilerativo et expresso mandalo Re- 
gis.”(2) But, whenever instances have occurred in which 
ibinabeeennee the 
(1)Rocheflavin des Parlemens de France, liv. 13, cap. 17. No. 3. p. 702 
Papon, troisiéme Note, tit. de laclanse “ car ainsi nous plait,” p. 334 
and 356—Pasquier, Recherches de la France, lib. cap. 4.—Loyseau des 
Seigneuries, cap. 3. no. 11,-—Des Offices, lib. 4, cap. 5. No. 67-—Coquille 
Inet. au Droit Frangois, cap. Ist.-Hericourt, Loix Ecclesiastique, p. 
304. cap. 16, sec. 10.--Maximes du Droit Public Frangois, vol. 4. 0. 57. 
(2) Maximes du Droit Public Frangois, vol. 4, p, 240 & se. 1 q. 
