so passionately to have
restored, is much disputed by antiquaries, and our ignorance of them
seems one of the greatest defects in the ancient English history. The
collection of laws in Wilkins, which pass under the name of Edward,
are plainly a posterior and an ignorant compilation. Those to be
found in Ingulf are genuine; but so imperfect, and contain so few
clauses favourable to the subject, that we see no great reason for
their contending for them so vehemently. It is probable, that the
English meant the COMMON LAW, as it prevailed during the reign of
Edward; which we may conjecture to have been more indulgent to liberty
than the Norman institutions. The most material articles of it were
afterwards comprehended in Magna Charta.

NOTE [L]

Ingulf, p. 70. H. Hunt. p. 370, 372. M. West. p. 225. Gul. Neub. p.
357. Alured. Beverl. p. 124. De Gest. Angl. p. 333. M. Paris, p. 4.
Sim. Dun. p. 206. Brompton, p. 962, 980, 1161. Gervase Tilb. lib. i.
cap. 16. Textus Roffensis apud Seld. Spicileg. ad Eadm. p. 179. Gul.
Pict. p. 206. Ordericus Vitalis, p. 621, 666, 853. Epist. St. Thom.
p. 801. Gul. Malmes. p. 52, 57. Knyghton, p. 2354. Eadmer. p. 110.
Thom. Rudborne in Ang. Sacra, vol. i. p. 248. Monach. Roff. in Ang
Sacra, vol. ii. p. 276. Girald. Camb. in eadem, vol. ii. p. 413.
Hist Elyensis, p. 516. The words of this last historian, who is very
ancient, are remarkable and worth transcribing: "REX ITAQUE FACTUS
WILLIELMUS, QUID IN PRINCIPES ANGLORUM, QUI TANTAE CLADI SUPERESSE
POTERANT, FECERIT, DICERE, CUM NIHIL PROSIT, OMITTO. QUID ENIM
PRODESSET, SI NEC UNUM IN TOTO REGNO DE ILLIS DICEREM PRISTINA
POTESTATE UTI PERMISSUM, SED OMNES AUT IN GRAVEM PAUPERTATIS AERUMNAM
DETRUSOS, AUT EXHAEREDATOS, PATRIA PULSOS, AUT EFFOSSIS OCULIS, VEL
CAETERIS AMPUTATIS MEMBRIS OPPROBRIUM HOMINUM FACTOS, AUT CERTE
MISERRIME AFFLICTOS, VITA PRIVATOS? SIMILI MODO UTILITATE CARERE
EXISTIMO DICERE QUID IN MINOREM POPULUM, NON SOLUM AB EO, SED A SUIS
ACTUM SIT, CUM ID DICTU SCIAMUS DIFFICILE, ET OB IMMANEM CRUDELITATEM,
FORTASSIS INCREDIBILE."

NOTE [M]

Henry, by the feudal customs, was entitled to levy a tax for the
marrying of his eldest daughter, and he exacted three shillings a hide
on all England. H. Hunt. p. 379. Some historians (Brady, p. 270, and
Tyrrel, vol. ii. p. 182) heedlessly make this sum amount to above
eight hundred thousand pounds of our present money: but it could not
exceed one hundred and