The Sun.
London, England, 1826-07-21 00:00:00

injtiriout to all branches of the mining department, as it
will maka the price of carriage much higher. Within this
fortnight corn has risen in the proportion of 7 to 10, and
from Neuke, Skaraborg, &c., much higher prices are
reported.
.fur Y 7.—The fires in the forests near the city rage
with greater fury than ever.

EXCHANGE ON LONDON.
HAIISBURGN, JULY 14.-37 2} ; two months, 36 11k.
PETERSBURGH, JUNE
BERLIN, JULY 11.—Three months, 7 2.
VIENNA, JULY I.—Two months, 10 2.

We hare been informed of the following singular
circumstance which took place at Paris on the evening,
and during the night, of the 14th instant. The
English Embassy was in a great bustle in con-
sequence of dispatches received from some part
of the Continent ; and on Saturday morning
early (the 15th) a messenger was dispatched to
London. Contrary to all custom, the messenger was
accompanied by one of the secretaries, as far as Beau-
vais, to prevent any delay or, strange to say, any
arbitrary or illegal act, on the part of any authority
on the other side the Channel. This seems to augur
something very important, and may probably account
for the importance attributed to the frequent.sittings
of our Cabinet.

By putting the query, contained in the concluding
part of our article upon the Codification of the Eng-
lish Law, in our Paper of yesterday, it may be said
that we furnished an argument in favour of a legislative
rather than a judicial codification of the law, because,
in that event, it would be easy to meet the case by a
direct enactment. In reply to this, we can only admit
the truth of the proposition ; and if, indeed, it were
possible thus to meet every case that could arise, the
argument would be irresistible ; but as that cannot be
done, it may be very fairly questioned whether any
advantage is gained by particularizing cases in legis-
lative provisions, or whether it is not far better for
a legislator to make his laws as general as pos-
sible, leaving the Courts to give them effect,
and to apply them as the cases arise. This
indeed is a power which the Courts of Law
at present possess, and which they use with that
discretion and wisdom as would leave the public but
little to fear were the statutes couched in less particu-
lar terms. Thus the Judges would be compelled to
decide, rather by the spirit than the letter of the Act;
and whilst they would not be allowed to abrogate, or
alter the positive enactments of the Parliament, they
would be permitted to temper its provisions with
equity, to apply them according to their own ideas of
justice, consistently with previous decisions on the
same law, and to supply what was wanting to give them
full and proper effect.
The aim of the framers of the Acts of Parliament
in these days, is to meet every
.possible case that can
be suggested. In doing this it would appear they
commence with a very general provision, which is in-
tended to comprehend the spirit of the proposed law,
and they then descend to provide for the particular
cases that the mind suggests as not being positively,
and without doubt, within the reach of the first gene-
ral provision. But in pr6viding for these particular
cases they seem to forget, they confine the opera-
tion of the general provision to very narrow bounds,
because the Judges cannot in that case give that full
and extensive meaning to the words they would, if the
particular clauses had not been annexed. They
regard these particular clauses in a manner as a legis-
ive construction of the general provision, and thus
nearly the whole force and effect of it is frittered away;
the more especially as the Courts hold it of the first
importance to render a statute consistent in its opera-
tion throughout. But, this is not the only disadvan-
tage attending the enactment of laws, applying to pars
I
ticular cases. t renders it absolutely necessary that every
statute should be construed according to its strict letter,
and meaning, and this gives rise to those quirks and
quibbles of which the public in general so much dis-
approve. Such is the effect of a leOslative declaration
of the common law, that lawyers all say, that for every
doubt settled by Act of Parliaim st, at least ten new
ones are raised ; and it is indisputable that lawyers
lose nothing by these attempts at simplification. Now
all this furnishes sufficient reason for opposing a legis-
lative codification, and proves unanswerably that a
code could be of no use, unless it were framed under
the direction of the twelve Judges, and derived its
whole virtue and effect from the voluntary respect that
would certainly be paid to their opinions so expressed.
Par who does not perceive that there is all the difference in
the world between giving effect to an Act of Parliament,
and using the expressed opinions of former Judges as
a guide. In proof of the truth and correctness of this
argument against legislative codification, let us take
an instance. The Act that best suits our purpose
is the statute of frauds, it being now upwards of 150
years old, and some of the provisions of which are
constantly being acted upon. It has been said that
this act has been elucidated at an expense of 100,0001.
a sum which is rather under than over the mark ; and
yet this Act was framed by the first lawyers of the day,
and would serve as a good model on which to draw
future statutes. To contrast any clause of this act with
the decisions that have been made upon it, might lead one
at first to wish that each particular case had been met by
express words. But when we look at
positivets andedecisions, and begin to alter the clause, to meet
decidedly these cases, we find it swell to such im-
measurable length, and become so overloaded with
word so restricted by saving clauses, or so enlarged
by extending clauses, that the principle vanishes in the
by
yy
conflict, and leaves a wordy sentence, the meaning of
which is to be ascertained without reference to law or
justice, or even the f
Independentlyit.
of the
considerations, case
to
be
for decided
ever
v e
as etthse (s )ef
doubt removed, six or eight new ones arise, and,
altogether, it will be found that nothing is to
be gained by the alteration. In seeking after a
clearness incompatible with any language, we have
lost the e t ll* and simplicity that was
with-
in our reach. We had drawn out this amend-
silent of the statute of frauds, but found it too long for
oserti
i •
on, otherwise we were strangely tempted to ex-
hibit , this •
very curious document, as the best answer
to all those who carp at the law, and make what
theyuf
are pleased to 11 its absurdities object of b -
ca
foonery andridicule.perfect, not
freep Not that the law is
that it is from objection, but it unfortunately hap-
pens, that some of • very best and soun-
dest principles
its
are made the buttof whilst
these ill-judged remarks,
its really objectionable
parts are passed over unobserv-
ed, because the declaimer is ' :
utter} ignorant of the
subject he is so good as to attemt to illumine. Des-
pairing
of such a code as will answer the purpose, we
are content with
,things as they are, and as
No gentleman. will mail the age
By flogging ladies at a boarding
school ;
So no w its
will mend the la
until he has first
learnt' ts defects.