« ÖncekiDevam »
In omnibus quidem, maxime tamen in Jure, æquitas spectanda sit.
Dig. Lib. I. tit. xvij. 89.
V. & R. STEVENS AND G. S. NORTON,
Law Booksellers and Publishers,
AND A. MILLIKEN, DUBLIN.
In offering this Treatise to the notice of the Profession, the Author feels himself called upon to say a few words in explanation. He is far from imagining himself very competent to discharge the task he has attempted. Yet, when he considers that up to the present day there has appeared not a single work on this not unimportant subject, he ventures to hope that even this compilation may be found of service. It was the want under which he personally laboured of the means of informing himself upon the present state of the law relating to the Roman Catholic body in Britain and its colonies, that first led the Author to undertake, for his own benefit, those inquiries, the results of which he now presumes to lay before the public. In doing so, he is quite conscious of the many imperfections which are very likely to abound in a work of the first impression. But if he shall have succeeded in facilitating the further researches of more able and learned inquirers than himself, and of clearing their path of some of those embarrassments which he has found
his the Author's success will have been quite equal to his expectations.
As far as the Author is aware, he has endeavoured never to make use of the industry of other compilers without acknowledgment. For the concluding Chapter upon Colonies, he is especially responsible. The silence
of Mr. Justice Story, Mr. Burge, and other learned cominentators, upon this interesting point in the conflicts of imperial with local laws, has been frequently lamented by those to whom some information would have been particularly desirable.
Where so much doubt exists as to the present applicability of certain ancient statutes and supposed legal maxims, the Author feels every confidence in craving, as he does, the indulgence of his readers for the views he has occasionally expressed. He more especially refers to the Chapters on Charities.
It has been a rule with him to confine his work, as much as possible, to the laws peculiarly, and eo nomine, affecting the Roman Catholics. Circumstances have occasionally created exceptions to this rule. To some laws nonconformists of every denomination are equally subject. In other instances, and particularly in that of the law of Charities, it was difficult to adhere to the rule without incurring the hazard of not being sufficiently understood. Perhaps he has acted wisely in deserving the censure of prolixity, rather than the selfreproach of the poet :
Brevis esse laboro;
T. C. A.
1, Plowden Buildings, Temple,
May 3rd, 1842.
NAMES OF CASES.
PAGE Adams and Lambert's Case 118 Archbishop of Canterbury's Case
44 Attorney General v. Cock
138 v. The Fishmongers' Company
127 0. Gaunt
152 0. Griffith 42, 109 v. Hickman 132 0. Lepine 158 v. Matthews 132
v. Mayor of London
160 0. Pearson
120, 132, 133, 148, 152 v. Power 135, 152 v. Rigby 151 v. Stephens 161 v. Stewart 168,
183 v. Todd 125, 165
Edwards 0. The Bishop of
157 Evans's Case
74, 127, 184
168 Campbell v. Hall Campian's Case
109 Cary v. Abbot 110, 116, 121, 124,
133 Chadwick v. Smith
141 Cockburn o. Raphael, 151, 159, 163,
176-7 Collyer v. Burnett
157 Corbyn v. French
129 Cottington v. Fletcher
15 Craigdallie v. Aikman
Porter 0. Clerke
147 Provost of Edinburgh v. Aubery 157