ſary, ſays he[1], for a ſenator to be thoroughly acquainted with the conſtitution; and this, he declares, is a knowlege of the moſt extenſive nature; a matter of ſcience, of diligence, of reflexion; without which no ſenator can poſſibly be fit for his office.”
The miſchiefs that have ariſen to the public from inconſiderate alterations in our laws, are too obvious to be called in queſtion; and how far they have been owing to the defective education of our ſenators, is a point well worthy the public attention. The common law of England has fared like other venerable edifices of antiquity, which raſh and unexperienced workmen have ventured to new-dreſs and refine, with all the rage of modern improvement. Hence frequently it’s ſymmetry has been deſtroyed, it’s proportions diſtorted, and it’s majeſtic ſimplicity exchanged for ſpecious embelliſhments and fantaſtic novelties. For, to ſay the truth, almoſt all the perplexed queſtions, almoſt all the niceties, intricacies, and delays (which have ſometimes diſgraced the Engliſh, as well as other, courts of juſtice) owe their original not to the common law itſelf, but to innovations that have been made in it by acts of parliament; “overladen (as ſir Edward Coke expreſſes it[2]) with proviſoes and additions, and many times on a ſudden penned or corrected by men of none or very little judgment in law.” This great and well-experienced judge declares, that in all his time he never knew two queſtions made upon rights merely depending upon the common law; and warmly laments the confuſion introduced by ill-judging and unlearned legiſlators. “But if, he ſubjoins, acts of parliament were after the old faſhion penned, by ſuch only as perfectly knew what the common law was before the making of any act of parliament concerning that matter, as alſo how far forth former ſtatutes had provided remedy for former miſchiefs, and defects diſcovered by experience; then ſhould very few queſ-
