THE JURISDICTION OF THE MARCHES. 299 



withstanding the case was altered, yet the clerk of the 

 crown pursued the former precedent; hurt it did none, for 

 the word marches is there superfluous. 



And whereas it was said, that the words in those com 

 missions were effectual, because else the proceeding in the 

 four new erected shires of Wales should be cor am nonjudice, 

 that objection carrieth no colour at all ; for it is plain, they 

 have authority by the word principality of Wales, without 

 adding the word marches; and that is proved by a number 

 of places in the statute of 34, where if the word Wales 

 should not comprehend those shires, they should be excluded 

 in effect of the whole benefit of that statute ; for the word 

 marches is never added in any of these places. 



To the third head touching the true intent of the statute, 

 he first noted how naked their proof was in that kind, which 

 was the life of the question, for all the rest was but in lit era 

 ct in cortice. 



He observed also that all the strength of our proof, that 

 concerned that point, they had passed over in silence, as 

 belike not able to answer : for they had said nothing to the 

 first intentions of the erections of the court, whereupon the 

 parliament built : nothing to the diversity of penning, 

 which was observed in the statute of 34, leaving out the word 

 marches, and resting upon the word Wales alone : nothing 

 to the resiance, nothing to the denomination, nothing to the 

 continual practice before the statute and after, nothing to 

 the king s instructions, &c. 



As for that, that they gather out of the title and preamble, 

 that the statute was made for Wales, and for the weal and 

 government of Wales, and at the petition of the subjects of 

 Wales, it was little to the purpose ; for no man will affirm on 

 our part the four English shires were brought under the 

 j urisdiction of that council, either first by the king, or after 

 by the parliament, for their own sakes, being in parts no 

 farther remote ; but it was for congruity s sake, and for the 

 good of Wales, that that commixture was requisite : and 

 turpis est pars, qua non congruit cum toto. And therefore 

 there was no reason that the statute should be made at 

 their petition, considering they were not primi in intentions, 

 but came ex consequents 



And whereas they say that usage is nothing against an 

 act of parliament, it seems they do voluntarily mistake, 

 when they cannot answer; for we do not bring usage to 

 cross an act of parliament, where it is clear, but to expound 

 an act of parliament, where it is doubtful, and evermore 

 contemporanea interpretatio, whether it be of statute or 



