may be] was this day duly registered before me as a voter for this city [town or borough, as the case may be], in right of his being a resident freeman. [or resident forty-shilling freeholder, as the case may be]. Dated this day of at O. judge, chairman, assistant barrister, or barrister, &c. On the 11th July, 1832, parliament prepared and passed an act which received the royal assent on the above date, for abolishing the punishment of death in certain cases, and substituting a lesser in place of it.* By the act for consolidating and amending the laws in England relative to larceny, and other offences connected therewith, it is among other things enacted, that if any person shall steal in any dwelling-house any chattel, money, or valuable security, to the value in whole of five pounds or more, every such offender, being convicted thereof, shall suffer death as a felon; and, by the same act, whoever shall steal any horse, mare, gelding, colt, or filly, or any bull, cow, ox, heifer, or calf, or any ram, ewe, sheep, or lamb, or shall wilfully kill any of such cattle with intent to steal the carcass or skin, or any part of the cattle so killed, every such offender shall be guilty of felony, and suffer death as a felon on conviction.† And by another act for consolidating and amending the laws in Ireland relative to larceny and other offences, it is among other things enacted, that if any person shall steal any of the articles above enumerated, on conviction shall suffer death as a felon. It being, therefore, deemed expedient that a milder punishment than that of death should be inflicted for any of these offences, so much of the said acts which inflicted the penalty of death for any of the before named felonies were repealed; and, in place thereof, from and after the 11th July, 1832, any person convicted of any of the above named felonies, or of counselling, aiding, or abetting their commission, shall be transported beyond seas for life. This act expressly prohibits the governors or lieutenant-governors of any colony from giving any pardon or ticket of leave to any person transported, or who shall receive a pardon on condition of transportation, or any order or permission to suspend or remit the labour of any such person, except in cases of illness, until such person, if transported for seven years, shall have served four; if transported for fourteen years, shall have served six; or if transported for life, shall have served eight years of labour. It also determines that no person shall be capable of acquiring or holding any property, or of bringing any action for the recovery of any property, until such person shall have duly obtained a pardon from the governor or lieutenant-governor of the colony or settlement in which he or she shall have been confined: provided that nothing in the act, however, shall in any manner affect his majesty's royal prerogative of mercy.t *7 and 8 Geo. IV., c. 29. 9 Geo. IV., c. 55. # 2 and 3 Will. IV., c. 63. THE municipal law of England is divided into two kinds-the unwritten or common law, and the written or statute law. The unwritten law includes not only general customs, or the common law, properly so called; but also the particular customs of certain parts of the kingdom; and likewise those particular laws that are by custom observed only in certain courts and jurisdictions. Lord chief justice Wilmot has said, that "the statute law is the will of the legislature in writing; the common law is nothing else but statutes worn out by time. All our law began by consent of the legislature, and whether it is now law by usage or writing is the same thing. Both statute law and common law originally flowed from the same fountain"—that is, from the sovereign, with consent and advice of his parliament. And lord Hale declares to the same effect," that many of those things that we now take for common law, were undoubtedly acts of parliament, though not now to be found on record.” Though this is undoubtedly the origin of the greatest part of the common law, yet much t of it certainly has been introduced by usage, even of modern date, which general convenience has adopted. Such for instance is the law of the road, that horses and carriages should invariably keep the left side of the road, and consequently in meeting should pass each other on the whip hand. This law has not been enacted by statute, and is so modern that professor Christian is the first who has mentioned it in a book of law. But general convenience discovered its necessity, and the judges have so far confirmed it, as to declare frequently at nisi prius, that whoever disregards this salutary rule, is answerable in damages for all the consequences. The laws relating to bills of exchange, insurance, and all mercantile contracts, are ask much the general law of the land, as those relating to marriage, or murder. And, in consequence, merchants have frequently imagined that all their new fashions and devices immediately become the law of the land, which is a mistake: merchants ought to take their law from the courts, and not the courts from merchants. The written laws of the kingdom are statutes, acts, or edicts, made by the king's majesty, by and with the consent of the three estates of parliament, the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in parliament assembled; of which Magna Charta is the oldest now extant, as confirmed in parliament, 9 Hen. III., though doubtless there were many acts before that time, the records of which are now lost, and their determinations are at present, perhaps, currently received for the maxims of the old common law. Statutes are either general or special, public or private. A general or public act is an universal rule, that regards the whole community: and of which the courts of law are bound to take notice judicially and ex officio: without the statute being particularly pleaded, or formally set * Hist. Com. Law. forth by the party who claims an advantage under it. Special or private acts are rather exceptions than rules, being those which only operate upon particular persons and private concerns: and of these (which are not promulgated with the same notoriety as the former) the judges are not bound to take notice, unless they be formally shown and pleaded.* For instance, the statute to prevent spiritual persons from making leases for longer terms than twenty-one years, is a public act: because it is a rule prescribed to the whole body of spiritual persons in the nation: but an act for any particular bishop to make a lease to A. B. for sixty years, is an exception to this rule; it concerns only the parties and that particular bishop's successors: and is therefore a private act. Statutes are also either declaratory of the common law, or remedial of some of its defects, and are therefore generally mentioned in contradistinction to penal statutes; declaratory, where the old custom of the kingdom is almost fallen into disuse or become disputable; remedial, those statutes which are made to supply such defects, and abridge such superfluities in the common law, as arise either from the general imperfection of all human laws, from change of time and circumstances, from the mistakes and unadvised determinations of judges, or from any other cause whatsoever. And to accomplish this, the common law must be enlarged where it was too circumscribed, or restrained where it was too lax and luxuriant; which has given rise to another subordinate division of remedial acts, called enlarging and restraining statutes. In attending to the rules to be observed in the construction of statutes, it may be remarked, that there are three points to be considered in the exposition of ali remedial laws: that is, how the common law stood at the making of the act; what the mischief was for which the common law did not provide; and what remedy the parliament may have already provided. Again, a statute which treats of things and persons of an inferior rank, cannot by any general words be extended to those of a superior. Thus a statute treating of deans and others having spiritual promotions, is held not to extend to bishops. With respect to penal statutes, they must be construed strictly, though the statutes against frauds are to be liberally and beneficially expounded. The reason of this difference is, because the former statutes act upon the offender, whereas the latter upon the offence: and in all statutes, one part must be construed by another, so that the whole, if possible, may stand. Supposing the common law and a statute should differ, the former gives place to the latter; and an old statute is superseded by a new one. if a statute which repeals another be itself repealed, the first statute is thereby revived without any formal words for that purpose. But Many places besides the realm of England are subject to its laws. Wales continued for many centuries independent of England; it was subdued * 13 Eliz, c. 10. and divided among the conquerors by William I.; it was completely annexed to the crown of England by Edward I. in 1203; but, till the reign of Henry VIII. it was governed by its own laws. In the year 1535 an act of parliament declared that the dominion of Wales shall be for ever united to the kingdom of England: that all Welshmen born shall have the same liberties as other the king's subjects; that lands in Wales shall be inheritable according to the English tenures and rules of descent; that the laws of England, and none other, shall be used in Wales: with many other provisions with regard to the regulation of the police of this ancient principality. This union sent twenty-seven Welsh members into the English house of commons, which continued till the late reform bill altered the whole constitution. On the death of Alexander III., a disputed succession to the crown of Scotland, gave Edward I. a pretence for meddling in its affairs, and partly by treachery, and partly by force of arms, he reduced that kingdom for a short time to the dominion of the laws of England. He carried the crown and regalia to England, with all its public records, the latter of which were lost in conveying them back to Scotland by sea, in 1660, in the reign of Charles II. Notwithstanding the happy accession of James I., Scotland continued for more than a century a separate and independent kingdom, although formed by nature to be but one people. Sir Edward Coke observes how marvellous a conformity there was, not only in the religion and language of the two nations, but also in their ancient laws, the descent of their crowns, their parliaments, their titles of nobility, their officers of state and of justice, their writs, their customs, and even the language of their laws. Upon which account he supposes the common law of each to have been originally the same; especially as the most ancient and authentic book called Regia Majestas, containing the most ancient common law of Scotland, is extremely similar to that of Glanvil, which contains the principles of the English common law, as it stood in the reign of Henry II. And the many diversities subsisting between the two laws at present, may be easily accounted for, from a diversity of practice, in two large jurisdictions, which had no communication with each other, and from the acts of two distinct and independent parliaments, which have in many points altered and abrogated the old common law of both kingdoms. The municipal or common laws of England are, generally speaking, of no force or validity in Scotland; because, by the act of union, her own' municipal laws were ordained to be observed, unless altered by parliament. The town of Berwick-upon-Tweed was originally part of the realm of Scotland, and, as such, was for a time reduced by king Edward I. into the possession of the crown of England; during which subjection, it received from that prince a charter which was confirmed by king Edward III. with some additions after it was ceded by Edward Baliol, to be for ever united to the crown and realm of England; and it was particularly granted that it should be governed by the laws and usages which it enjoyed during the time of king Alexander III., before its reduction. James I. new-modelled its constitution, and granted a new charter, putting it upon an English footing. Though it has, therefore, some local peculiarities, derived from the ancient laws of Scotland, yet, it is now clearly part of the realm of England, being represented by burgesses in the house of commons, and bound by all the acts of the British parliament, whether specially named or otherwise. Ireland, originally called Ierni, Hibernia, and also Scotia, was formerly governed by its own kings, till it was conquered by Henry II. It was denominated the lordship or dominion of Ireland, and the king was simply styled dominus Hiberniæ, lord of Ireland, till the 33d year of the reign of Henry VIII., when he assumed the title of king. Henry II. planted an English colony in it, from whom a great proportion of the present inhabitants are descended, and the laws of England were then received and sworn to by the Irish nation assembled at the council of Lismore; and, although Ireland continued from that time to the reign of George III. a distinct kingdom, still it remained in a state of dependence on England, and necessarily conformed to, and was bound by, such laws as the superior state thought proper to prescribe or sanction. At the time of its conquest, Ireland was governed by the Brehon law, so styled from the name of the Irish judges, who were called Brehons: to which the Irish clung tenaciously till Edward III. entirely abolished it by an act of parliament holden at Kilkenny, which unanimously declared it to be "no law but a lewd custom crept in of later times." The delay occasioned by sending over acts of the Irish parliament to the British ministry before they could pass into a law, created much inconvenience, which evil with some others, turned the attention of the English cabinet to a union of the two kingdoms, the articles of which have been already given, p. 267. This great political measure was completed on the 2d July, 1800, when an act was passed in order to promote and secure the essential interests of Great Britain and Ireland, and to consolidate the strength, power, and resources of the British empire. The Isle of Man was formerly a distinct territory from England, and was not governed by its laws, neither, unless particularly named, did an act of parliament extend to it. It was anciently a subordinate feudatory kingdom, subject to the crown of Norway; then to king John and Henry III. of England, and afterwards to the kings of Scotland, which is the reason that the bishop of Sodor and Man has not a seat in the house of lords; it afterwards fell to the crown of England; and at length Henry IV. claimed the island in right of conquest, and conferred it on the earl of Northumberland; upon whose attainder it was granted under the title of |