This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated.1822 Excerpt: ... the bulk of our laws, considered merely in itself, I own, I do not see it in the light some affect to place it in. read, remember, and understand The excellent sense of the following sentences from the same passage, may well excuse me for quoting them; and, perhaps, in this age of bigotted averseness to innovation, I have need of some apology for what I have ventured to say. "I remember the opinion of a wise and learned statesman and lawyer (the Chancellor Oxenstiern), that multiplicity of written laws do but distract the judges, and render the law less certain; that where the law sets due and clear bounds betwixt the prerogative royal, and the rights of the people, and gives remedy in private causes, there needs no more laws to be increased; for thereby litigation will be increased likewise. It were a work worthy of a parliament, and cannot be done otherwise, to cause a review of all our statutes, to repeal such as they shall judge inconvenient to remain in force; to confirm those which they shall think fit to stand, and those several statutes which are confused, some repugnant to others, many touching the same matter, to be reduced into certainty, all of one subject into one statute, that perspicuity and clearness may appear in our written laws, which at this day few students or sages can find in them."--1 Whitelocke's Commentary on the King's Writ for choosing Members to serve in Parliament, 409. So the learned Harrington, in the appendix to his observations on the more ancient statutes, page 559, 5th ed. says, the reformation of the Code of Statutes, however, so far as to repeal obsolete, and sometimes dangerous laws, as well as the reducing the different acts of parliament which relate to the same subject, into one consistent statute, would be a salut...