Conclusion. Fifthly, To omit all those statutes which, although enacted to be public statutes, yet are only of private concern: such as those for bridges in particular places, or paving the streets in such a market town; and the like. Sixthly, As to the rest, to lay all the statutes and clauses of statutes together, which relate to the same subject, and out of the whole to compose one, two, or more uniform and consistent statutes; and then to repeal all those other, as workmen destroy the scaffolding when they have erected the building. I know but of one material objection against this method of proceeding; and that is, that the law being now for the most part well settled upon the statutes, notwithstanding their acknowledged disorder and confusion, this would tend to unsettle all again, by breaking the connection which there is between one statute and another, and one part of a statute and another, altering the words and phrases, and after all, perhaps, not much mending the matter, since it is possible that the new statutes may be as liable to objections as the former were. But this is an argument not so much against the thing itself, as against the manner in which it may be executed. As to breaking the connexion, it is certain that for the most part there is no connexion; and where there is, that may easily be preserved. And it ought to be laid down as an invariable rule, to retain as much as possible the identical words and sentences of the former statutes; only rejecting what is superfluous, inserting the clear law as it now stands, and putting the same into a form more regular, concise, and easy. And this seemeth no way impossible to be done by any person of a tolerable understanding, endowed only with a clear head and much patience. END OF VOL. V. G. H. Davidson, Printer, Ireland Yard, |