372 L A 
review Ins yet been perfefled, upon this ftatute now de¬ 
pends the authority of the canon-law in England. 
As for the canons enabled by the clergy under James I. 
in the year 1603, and never confirmed in parliament, it 
has been folemnly adjudged, upon the principles of law 
and the constitution, that, where they are not merely de¬ 
claratory of the ancient canon-law, but are introductory 
of new regulations, they do not bind the laity, whatever 
regard the clergy may think proper to pay them. 
There are four fpecies of courts, in which the civil and 
canon laws are permitted, under different restrictions, to 
be tifed. r. The courts cf the archbifhop and bifhops, 
and their derivative officers ; ufually called Courts Chrif- 
tian, Curies Chrijlianitalis , or ecclefiaftical courts, a. The 
military courts. 33. The courts of admiralty. 4. The 
courts of the two univerfities. In all, their reception in 
general, and the different degrees of that reception are 
grounded entirely upon cuftom ; corroborated in the lat¬ 
ter inftance by att of parliament, ratifying thofe charters 
• which confirm the cuftomary law of the univerfities. 
The more minute consideration of them has been given 
.under the head Courts of Law, vol. v. p. 297. It 
will fuffice at prefent to remark a few particulars relative 
.to them all, which may ferve to inculcate more Strongly 
-the doCtrine laid down concerning them. 
And fir ft, The courts of common law have the fuper- 
-intendenev over thefe courts ; to keep them within their 
.jurisdictions ; to determine wherein they exceed them ; to 
reftrain and prohibit fuch excefs ; and (in cafe of contu¬ 
macy) to punifli the officer who executes, and in fome 
cafes the judge who enforces, the fenteace fo declared to 
be illegal. 
The common law has referved to itfelf the expofition 
•of all fuch afts of parliament as concern either the extent 
of thefe courts or the matters depending before them. 
And therefore, if thefe courts either refufe to allow thefe 
•a£fs of parliament, or will expound them in any other 
fenfe than what the common law puts upon them, the 
•king’s courts at Weftminfter will grant prohibitions to 
reftrain and concroul them. See King’s Bench, vol. xi. 
An appeal lies from all thefe courts to the king, in the 
Lift refort; which proves that the jurisdiction exercifed in 
•them is derived from the crown of England, and not from 
any foreign potentate, or intrinfic authority of their own. 
And, from thefe three flrong marks and enfigns of fupe- 
riority, it appears beyond a doubt, that the civil and ca¬ 
non laws, though admitted in fome cafes by cuftom in 
fome courts, are only Subordinate; and leges fub graviori 
lege ; and that, thus admitted, reftrained, altered, new- 
modelled, and amended, they are by no means with us a 
diftinCt independent fpecies of laws, but are inferior 
branches of the cuftomary or unwritten laws of England, 
properly called the king's ecclefaftical, the king's military, the 
king's maritime, or the king's academical, laws. 
Of Statute Law. —The leges feripta, or written laws 
of the kingdom, are the Statutes, afts, or edicts, made 
by the king’s majefty, by and with the advice of the 
lords fpiritual and temporal, and commons, in parliament 
alTembled. The oldeft of thefe now extant, and printed 
in our ftatute-bcoks, is the famous Magna Charta, as 
confirmed in parliament 9 Hen. III. though doubtlefs 
there were many afts before that time, the records of 
which are now lolt, and the determinations of them per¬ 
haps at prefent currently received for the maxims of the 
cld common law. 
The method of citing afts of parliament is various. 
Many of the ancient ftatutes are called after the name of 
the place where the parliament was held that made them ; 
as the ftatutes of Merton and Marlebergc, of Weflminfer, Glou- 
etfer, and Winckejtcr. Others are denominated entirely 
from their lubjeft; as the ftatutes of Wales and Ireland, 
the articuli c/eri, and the prerogativa regis. Some are dif- 
tinguiflied by their initial .words, a method of citing very 
ancient; being ufed by the Jews, in denominating the 
w. 
books of the Pentateuch ; by the Chriftian church, in dif- 
tinguifhing their hymns and divine offices ; by the Ro- 
manifts, in deferibing their papal bulls ; and, in fliort, 
by the whole body of ancient civilians and canonifts, 
among whom this method of citation generally prevailed, 
not only with regard to chapters, but inferior feftions 
alfo : in invitation of all which we ftiil call fome of the 
old ftatutes by their initial words, as the ftatute of Quia 
emptores, and that of Circumfpefle agatis. But the molt 
ufual method of citing them, efpecially fince the time of 
Edward II. is by naming the year of the king’s reign in. 
which the ftatute was made, together with the chapter or 
particular act, according to its numeral order; as, 9 Geo. 
II. c. 4. For all the afts of one feftion of parliament 
taken together make properly but one ftatute; and there¬ 
fore, when two feftions have been held in one year, we 
ufually mention fat. 1 .or 2. Thus the bill of "rights is 
cited, as 1 W. & M.f. 2. c. 2. fignifying that it is the fe- 
cond chapter or afl of the fecond ftatute, or the laws 
made in the fecond feftions of parliament held in the firffc 
year of king William and queen Mary. 
As the manner of making ftatutes will be explained un¬ 
der the article Parliament, we fhall here only take no¬ 
tice of the different kinds of ftatutes; and of fome gene¬ 
ral rules with regard to their conltruftion. 
Firft, As to their feveral kinds. Statutes are either ge¬ 
neral or fpecial, public or private. A general or public aEl 
is an univerfal rule that regards the whole community ; 
and of this the courts of law are bound to take notice 
judicially and ex officio, without the ftatute being particu¬ 
larly pleaded, or formally let forth, by the party who 
claims an advantage under it. Special or private ails are 
rather exceptions than rules, being thole which only ope¬ 
rate upon particular perfons and private concerns ; fuch 
as the Romans entitled Jenatus decrcta, in contradistinction 
to the Jenatus confulta, which regarded the whole commu¬ 
nity ; and of thefe the judges are not bound to take no¬ 
tice, unlefs they be formally (hown and pleaded. To 
Ihow the diltinftion : the flat. 13 Eliz. c. 10. to prevent 
fpiritual perfons from making leafes for longer terms than 
twenty-one years or three lives, is a public acl ; it being a 
rule preferibed to the whole body of lpiritual perfons in 
the nation ; but an afl to enable the bilhop of Chefter to 
make a leafe to A. B. for fixty years, is an exception to 
this rule; it concerns only the parties and the billiop’s 
fucceffors, and is therefore a private aEl. 
Statutes alfo are either declaratory of the common law, 
or remedial of fome defeCts therein. Declaratory, where 
the old cuftom of the kingdom is almoft fallen into dif- 
ufe, or become difputable; in which cafe the parliament 
has thought proper, in perpetuum rei tefimonium, and for 
avoiding all doubts and difficulties, to declare what the 
common law is and ever hath been. Thus, the ftatute of 
treafons, 25 Edw. III. c. 2. doth not make any new fpe¬ 
cies of treafon ; but only, for the benefit of the fubjefl, 
declares and enumerates thofe feveral kinds of offence 
which before were treafon at the common law. Remedial 
ftatutes are thofe which are made to fupply fuch defeCts, 
and abridge fuch fuperfiuities, in the common law, as 
arife either from the general imperfection of all human 
laws, from change of time and circumstance's, from the 
miltakesand unadvifed determinations of unlearned judges, 
of from any other caufe whatfover. And this, being done 
either by enlarging the common law where it was too nar¬ 
row and circuinfcribed, or by restraining it where it was 
too lax and luxuriant, hath occasioned another fubordi¬ 
nate divifion of remedial aits of parliament into enlarging 
and refraining ftatutes. To inftance again in the cafe of 
treafon. Clipping the current coin of the kingdom was 
an offence not fufficieatly guarded againlt by the common 
law: therefore it was thought expedient by Statute 5 Eliz. 
c. 11. to make it high treafon, which it was not at the 
common law ; fo that this was an enlarging Statute. At 
common law, alfo, fpiritual corporations might leafe out 
3 their 
