I now only mention them incidentally, in order to remark the king's prerogative of making them; which is grounded upon this foundation, that the king, having the ſole adminiſtration of the government in his hands, is the beſt and the only judge, in what capacities, with what privileges, and under what diſtinctions, his people are the beſt qualified to ſerve, and to act under him. A principle, which was carried ſo far by the imperial law, that it was determined to be the crime of ſacrilege, even to doubt whether the prince had appointed proper officers in the ſtate[1].
V. Another light in which the laws of England conſider the king with regard to domeſtic concerns, is as the arbiter of commerce. By commerce, I at preſent mean domeſtic commerce only. It would lead me into too large a field, if I were to attempt to enter upon the nature of foreign trade, it's privileges, regulations, and reſtrictions; and would be alſo quite beſide the purpoſe of theſe commentaries, which are confined to the laws of England. Whereas no municipal laws can be ſufficient to order and determine the very extenſive and complicated affairs of traffic and merchandize; neither can they have a proper authority for this purpoſe. For as theſe are tranſactions carried on between ſubjects of independent ſtates, the municipal laws of one will not be regarded by the other. For which reaſon the affairs of commerce are regulated by a law of their own, called the law merchant or lex mercatoria, which all nations agree in and take notice of. And in particular it is held to be part of the law of England, which decides the cauſes of merchants by the general rules which obtain in all commercial countries; and that often even in matters relating to domeſtic trade, as for inſtance with regard to the drawing, the acceptance, and the transfer, of inland bills of exchange[2].
With us in England, the king's prerogative, ſo far as it relates to mere domeſtic commerce, will fall principally under the following articles.
