[ vii ]
cient English writers of the Common Law of this Kingdom [1]; yet it includes some heterogeneous positions (that have been forced upon it by the overbearing influence and corrupt practices of unlimited Imperial Courts) which are highly unreasonable and contradictory to the general equity of its other principles. A position of this kind, too implicitly received as Law, seems to be the ground-work of the learned Baron's difficulty: I mean that unreasonable and dangerous position of the Civil Law, Which attributes to the Prince's Will and Pleasure the Force of Law[2]. I do not find, in-deed,
- ↑ “What use our ancestors have made of the civil Law will readily appear to any one, that will take the trouble to compare the several works, which compose that voluminous body, with some of the most ancient English Lawyers, as Glanvil, Bracton, and others; who have adhered very closely to the rules and method of Justinian; have transcribed his Laws in their own proper language, and sometimes entire titles, as familiarly as if they were the original Laws of England.” Dr. Bever's Discourse on the Study of Juris-prudence and the Civil Law, p. 17.
- ↑ “Quod Principi piacuit (juxta Leges Civiles) Legis habet vigorem.” Fortescue de Laud. Leg. Ang. c. 35. p. 83.
In this same chapter the learned Chancellor Fortescue recites many dreadful effects of this abominable
