L A W. 
?94 
fpeCt of being able to difcharg* his debts, is entitled to 
the benefit of the cejfio ft” The creditors oppofed it, be- 
caufe a man who has, by a “ vein of extravagance,” with¬ 
out Ioffes, been reduced to indigence, is not entitled to 
the benefit of it. The petitioner contended, that mere 
extravagance of living, with his family, in the degree al¬ 
luded to, never had been in any inftance confidered as a 
bar to the cejfio ; and that, if he fhould be refufed that be¬ 
nefit, it would introduce a rule into the procefs of cejfo, 
different from what had been acted upon in all former 
praftices of the court. The court (22c! of June, 1811) 
“ refufed to the purfuer the benefit of the procefs of cjjio 
bonorum in hoc Jlatu .” The purfuer gave in a petition to 
the court againft this judgment, and the court (16th of 
Nov. 1811) “adhered to their former judgment.” Some 
of the judges expreffed an opinion, that it appeared to be 
a new kind of morality to fay, that a man is juftifiable 
for running into every fort of extravagance, provided he 
makes his wife and children fharers in that extravagance. 
Neither is a fraudulent bankrupt allowed this privilege; 
nor a criminal who is liable in any indemnification to 
the party injured or his executors, though the crime it- 
felf fhould be extinguifhed by a pardon. 
A difpofition granted on a ccjfo bonorum is merely in 
farther fecurity to the creditors, not in fatisfaftion of the 
debts. If, therefore, the debtor fhould acquire any eftate 
after his releafe, fuch eftate may be attached by his credi¬ 
tors, as if there had been no cejfio, except in fo far as is 
neceffary for his fubfiftence. Debtors, who are fet free on 
a cejfo bonorum, are obliged to wear a habit proper to dy¬ 
vours, or bankrupts. The lords are prohibited to dif- 
penfe with this mark of ignominy, unlefs, in the fummons 
and procefs of cejfo, it be proved that the bankruptcy pro¬ 
ceeds from misfortune. And bankrupts are condemned 
to fubmit to the habit, even where no fufpicion of fraud 
lies againft them, if they have been dealers in an illicit 
trade. 
Deforcement is the oppofition given, or refiftar.ee made, 
to meflengers or other officers, while they are employed 
in executing the law. It is punifhable with the confifca- 
tion of moveables, the one half to the king, and the other 
to the creditor at whole fuit the diligence was ufed. Armed 
perfons, to the number of three or more, aflifting in the 
illegal running, landing, or exporting, of prohibited or un- 
cultomed goods, or any who ihall refift, wound, or maim, 
any officer of the revenue, in the execution of his office, 
are punifhable with death and the confifcation of move¬ 
ables. 
Murder is the wilful taking away of a perfon’s life, with¬ 
out a neceffary caufe. The Scots law makes no diftinc- 
tion betwixt premeditated and fudden homicide; both 
are punifhed capitally. The punifhinent of parricide, or 
of the murder of a parent, is not confined to the crimi¬ 
nal himfelf: all his pofterity in the right line are declared 
incapabie of inheriting; and the fucceftion devolves on 
the next collateral heir. 
Duelling without licenfe from the king, is punifhable 
by death; and whatever perfon, principal or fecond, fhall 
give a challenge to fight a duel, or fhall accept a chal¬ 
lenge, cr otherwife engage therein, is punifhed by banifh- 
ment and efeheat of moveables, though no aftual fighting 
fhould. eufue. 
Execution. Criminal judges mull now fufpend for fome 
time the execution of fuch fentencesas aftett life or limb, 
that fo condemned criminals may have accefs to apply to 
the king for mercy. No fentence of any court of judica¬ 
ture fouth of the river Forth, importing either death or 
demembration, can be executed in lefs than thirty days ; 
and, if north of it, in lefs than forty days, after the date 
of the fentence. But corporal punifhments, lefs than 
death or difmembering, e. g. whipping, pillory, &c. may 
be inflifted eight days after fentence on this fide the 
Forth, and twelve days after fentence beyond it. 
V. Or the LAW or IRELAND. 
Ireland, until the late union, was a diftinft kingdofn; 
and, up to 22 & 23 Geo. III. a dependent fubordinate 
kingdom under the crown of Great Britain. 
Anciently it was only entitled the Dominion or Lord- 
fhip of Ireland, {Jlat. Hibernia, 14 Hen. III.) and the king’s 
ftyie was no other than dominus Hibernia, lord of Ireland, 
till the title of king was conferred upon him and his fuc- 
ceffors by a ftatute palled in Ireland exprefsly for that 
purpofe, and it was made trealon for any inhabitant of 
Ireland to deny it. 33 Hen. VIII. c. 1. IrijhJlat. 
The inhabitants of Ireland are, for the mod part de- 
feended from'the Englifh, who planted it as a kind of co¬ 
lony, after the conqueft of it by king Henry II. and the 
laws of England were then received and fwern to by the 
Irifh nation, affembled at the council of Lifmore. Pryn . 
on 4 InJl. 249. 
At the time of this conqueft, the Irifh were governed 
by what they called the Brchon-law, foftyled from the Irifh 
name of the judges, who were denominated brehons. \ lnjl. 
358. But king John, in the twelfth year of his reign, 
went into Ireland, and carried over with him many able 
fages of the law; and there, by his letters patent, in right 
of the dominion of conqueft, is faid to have ordained and 
eftablifhed, that Ireland fhould be governed by the laws 
of England; ( Vaugh. 294. 2 Pryn. Rec. 85. 7 Rep. 23 ) 
which letters patent, fir Edward Coke (1 Inf. 141.) ap¬ 
prehends to have been there confirmed in parliament. 
But to this ordinance many of the Irifh were averfe to 
conform, and ftill ftuck to their Brehon-law; fo that both 
Henry III. and Edward I. were obliged to renew the in¬ 
junction; and at length, in a parliament holden at Kil¬ 
kenny, 40 Edw. III. under Lionel duke of Clarence, then 
lieutenant of Ireland, the Brehon-law was formally abo- 
lifhed, it being unanimoufly declared to be “indeed no 
law, but a lewd cuftom crept in of later times.” And 
yet, even in the reign of queen Elizabeth, the wild na¬ 
tives ftill kept and preferred their Brehon law; which is 
deferibed ( Edm. Spenfer, p. 1513.) to have been “a rule 
of right unwritten, but delivered by tradition from one 
to another; in which oftentimes there appeared great 
fhow of equity in determining the right between party 
and party, but in many things repugnant quite both to 
God’s laws and man’s.” The latter part of this character 
is alone aferibed to it, by the laws before-cited of Ed¬ 
ward I. and his grandfon. See Ireland, vol. xi. p. 298. 
But, as Ireland was a diftinct dominion, and had par¬ 
liaments of its own, it is to be obferved, that, though the 
immemorial cuftoms or common law of England were 
made the rule of juftice in Ireland alfo, yet no aCts of the 
Englifh parliament extended into that kingdom, unlefs it 
were l'pecially named, or included under general words, 
fuch as, “ within any of the king’s dominions.” And this 
is particularly expreffed, and the reafon given (in the year¬ 
books; 20 Hen. VI. c. 8. 2 Ric. III.c. ir.) “A tax granted 
by the parliament of England fhall not bind thofe of Ire¬ 
land, becaufe they are not fummoned to our parliament;” 
and again, “Ireland hath a parliament of its own, and 
maketh and altereth laws ; and our ftatutes do not bind 
them, becaufe they do not fend knights to our parliament: 
but their perfons are the king’s fubjetts, like as the inha¬ 
bitants of Calais, Gafcoigne, and Guienne, while they 
continued under the king’s fubjeCtion.” The general run 
of laws, enafted by the fuperior ftate, are fuppofed to be 
calculated for its own internal government, and do not 
extend to its distant dependent countries, which, bearing 
no part in the legiflature, are not therefore in its ordinary 
and daily contemplation. But, when the fovereign legis¬ 
lative power fees it neceffary to extend its care to any of 
its fubordinate dominions, and mentions them exprefsly 
by name, or includes them under general words, there 
can be no doubt but then they are bound by its laws. 
Year Book, 1 Hen. VII. c. 3. 7 Rep. 22. Calvin’s cafe. 
The original method of palling ftatutes in Ireland was- 
nearly 
