S90I-2 TRANSACTIONS. 69 



results of obedience to the fundamental law of the Creator. 

 Although we find this doctrine expounded by such theolo- 

 gians as St. Thomas Aquinas (i) in the thirteenth century, 

 and Hooker (2) in the sixteenth, we have to go back to pagan 

 philosophy, to Chrysippus (3), the Stoic, and Cicero (4) to find 

 not indeed its origin, for that extends itself into a more 

 remote antiquity, but perhaps the earliest definite statement 

 of it. Still it must be confessed that we of the English 

 tongue are in worse case in respect of this confusion of ideas 

 than either the citizens of Imperial Rome or those of modern 

 European States For in the Latin we have two words signi- 

 fying ' Law ' : jus being the generic term for the whole body 

 of legal rules and relations, and lex denoting only so many 

 of them as inhere in legislative enactment. So in French we 

 have droit and loi^ and in German recht and £-esct2^ express- 

 ing the same distinction in meaning as the two Latin words 

 above quoted. On the other hand the single word ' law' in 

 English not onjv embraces the two great sub-divisions of jural 

 science, namely, custom and legislation, but has also to do 

 dut>- in physical science as denoting the method of natural 

 phenomena. Indeed, so various are the uses of our word 

 ' Law ' in the theoretical and practical sciences that it would 

 require more space than I have allotted to my whole subject 

 to discuss them with measurable completeness. Let me 

 then conclude my brief excursion into the seductive domain 

 of philology, b}' declaring that the law I treat of here is what 

 Sir William Marie by has so happily phrased as " the Law of 

 the Law\er." 



Now the ' law of the lawyer,' or, to use the more pre- 

 tentious locution of the schools. Positive Law or Jural Law, 

 I would venture to define as : T/ie aggregate of the various 

 limitaiiotts which the sovereign poioer in a State imposes up- 



(1) I. 2 Qu. 93, Art. 2. 



(2) Eccl. Pol. I. c. 18. 



(3) Apud D. Laert. vii., 



(4) De Leg. II. 4. 



