¹ Dugald Stewart, Account of the Life and Writings of Adam Smith, LL.D., reprinted in Smith, Adam, Essays on Philosophical Subjects, ed. Wightman, W. P. D. and Bryce, J. C. (Oxford, 1980), p. 311Google Scholar.

² On Adam Smith and Scotland, see esp. Haakonssen, Knud, The Science of a Legislator: The Natural Jurisprudence of David Hume and Adam Smith (Cambridge, 1981)Google Scholar; Winch, Donald, “Science and the Legislator: Adam Smith and After,” Economic Journal 113 (1983): 501–20Google Scholar; Burns, J. H., “Scottish Philosophy and the Science of Legislation,” Royal Society of Edinburgh Occasional Papers, 2–6 (1985): 11–29Google Scholar. Burns illuminates the wider intellectual stage in “The Fabric of Felicity: The Legislator and the Human Condition,” reprinted in The Study of Politics: A Collection of Inaugural Lectures, ed. King, Peter (London, 1977), pp. 207–24Google Scholar.

³ Pocock, J. G. A., “Virtues, Rights and Manners,” in his Virtue, Commerce, and History: Essays on Political Thought and History, Chiefly in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, 1985), p. 49Google Scholar; and Burns, , “Scottish Philosophy and the Science of Legislation,” p. 12Google Scholar.

⁴ Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, The Social Contract, trans. Cole, G. D. H. (London, 1955), pp. 32, 3, 31Google Scholar.

⁵ Beccaria, Cesare, An Essay of Crimes and Punishments (London, 1770), pp. 2–3Google Scholar.

⁶ Helvétius, Claude Adrien, De V esprit: or Essay on the Mind and its several faculties (London, 1759), p. 81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷ The context and implications of Stewart's limited endorsement of Bentham's legislative theory is valuably treated by Winch, Donald, “The Cause of Good Government: Philosophic Whigs versus Philosophic Radicals,” in That Noble Science of Politics: A Study of Nineteenth-Century Intellectual History, by Collini, Stefan, Winch, Donald, and Burrow, John (Cambridge, 1983), pp. 94–95Google Scholar.

⁸ Maine, Henry, Popular Government (1885), introduction by Cary, George W. (Indianapolis, 1976), p. 169Google Scholar.

⁹ Maitland, F. W., “History of English Law” (1902), Selected Historical Essays, ed. Cam, Helen M. (Cambridge, 1957), p. 113Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Bryce, James, Studies in History and Jurisprudence, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1901), 2:615Google Scholar.

¹¹ Maine, Henry, Ancient Law: Its Connection with the Early History of Society and its Relation to Modern Ideas (1861), reprint of the Beacon Paperback edition, introduction by Firth, Raymond (Gloucester, Mass., 1970), p. 244Google Scholar.

¹² Maine, Henry, Lectures on the Early History of Institutions (1875), 7th ed. (London, 1905), pp. 400, 397Google Scholar.

¹³ Blackstone, William, Commentaries on the Laws of England, ed. Chitty, Joseph, 4 vols. (London, 1826), 1:9Google Scholar; hereafter cited as Comm. with volume and page number following.

¹⁴ Comm., 4:11.

¹⁵ Bentham, Jeremy, A Comment on the Commentaries, and A Fragment on Government, both ed. Bums, J. H. and Hart, H. L. A. (London, 1977), p. 393Google Scholar.

¹⁶ Comm., 1:26–27.

¹⁷ Both Blackstone and his contemporaries receive fuller examination in Lieberman's, David monograph, The Province of Legislation Determined: Legal Theory in Eighteenth-Century Britain (Cambridge University Press, 1988), in press, from which much of the following discussion is drawnGoogle Scholar.

¹⁸ Lord Ellenborough , in Cobbett, 's Parliamentary Debates (London, 1812), 23:1083Google Scholar; cited in Jones, Gareth, ed., The Sovereignty of the Law: Selections from Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England (London, 1973), p. xxviiGoogle Scholar.

¹⁹ Blackstone, William, Commentaries on the Laws of England, ed. Christian, Edward, 4 vols. (London, 1803), 1:x (editorial advertisement)Google Scholar.

²⁰ For details on the first eight editions of the Commentaries, see Hammond, William, ed., Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 4 vols. (San Francisco, 1890)Google Scholar; for the nineteenth-century editions, see Dicey, A. V., “Blackstone's Commentaries,” Cambridge Law Journal 4 (1932): 286–307Google Scholar.

²¹ Comm., 1:vii (editorial preface).

²² Milsom, S. F. C., “The Nature of Blackstone's Achievement,” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 1 (1981): 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²³ Dicey, p. 294.

²⁴ Comm. (n. 13 above), 3:265–66; 4:443.

²⁵ Bentham, , A Fragment on Government (n. 15 above), p. 416Google Scholar. For more recent rehearsals of this theme, see Boorstin, Daniel J., The Mysterious Science of Law (an Essay on Blackstone's “Commentaries” …) (Cambridge, Mass., 1941), p. 189Google Scholar; and Kennedy, Duncan, “The Structure of Blackstone's Commentaries,” Buffalo Law Review 5(1979): 211Google Scholar.

²⁶ Comm., 3:196.

²⁷ Blackstone, William, An Analysis of the Laws of England (London, 1756), pp. v–viiiGoogle Scholar. More generally on the problem of rational arrangement in English legal writing, see Simpson, A. W. B., “The Rise and Fall of the Legal Treatise: Legal Principles and the Forms of Legal Literature,” University of Chicago Law Review 48 (1981), esp. 636–41, 655Google Scholar; and Milsom. The seventeenth-century models are reviewed in Shapiro, Barbara J., “Law and Science in Seventeenth-Century England,” Stanford Law Review 21 (1969): 727–66Google Scholar; and Wilfrid Prest provides an exemplary discussion of one important effort in “The Dialectical Origins of Finch's Law,” Cambridge Law Journal 36 (1977): 326–52Google Scholar. Some of the most challenging of current treatments of Blackstone's methods have linked the Commentaries to the tradition of civilian Institutional treatises, see esp. Cairns, John W., “Blackstone, an English Institutionist: Legal Literature and the Rise of the Nation State,” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 4 (1984): 318–60Google Scholar (which details the differences between Hale and Blackstone at pp. 347–50); and Lobban, Michael, “Blackstone and the Science of Law,” Historical Journal 30 (1987): 311–35Google Scholar.

²⁸ Cited in Holliday, John, The Life of William late Earl of Mansfield (London, 1797), pp. 89–90Google Scholar.

²⁹ Meredith, William, Letter to Dr Blackstone by the Author of the Question Stated, to which is prefixed, Dr. Blackstone's Letter to Sir William Meredith (London, 1770), p. 2Google Scholar. For other, like-minded contemporary evaluations, see Bever, Thomas, A Discourse on the Study of Jurisprudence and the Civil Law; Being an Introduction to a Course of Lectures (Oxford, 1766), pp. 35–36Google Scholar; and Pothier, Robert Joseph, A Treatise on the Law of Obligations or Contracts, trans. and introduction and notes by Evans, William David, 2 vols. (London, 1806), editorial introduction, 1:75Google Scholar.

³⁰ Bentham, , A Fragment on Government, p. 394Google Scholar.

³¹ Bentham, , A Comment on the Commentaries (n. 15 above), pp. 180, 202Google Scholar.

³² Bentham, , A Fragment on Government, p. 400Google Scholar.

³³ See Edward Gibbon's Autobiography, ed. Reese, M. M. (London, 1971), p. 94Google Scholar; and Holdsworth, William, A History of English Law, 16 vols. (London, 1922–1966), 12:727Google Scholar.

³⁴ Comm. (n. 13 above), 1:38.

³⁵ Ibid., pp. 39–40.

³⁶ Ibid., p. 41.

³⁷ Ibid., p. 44.

³⁸ Ibid., p. 41.

³⁹ Ibid., 2:2.

⁴⁰ For the argument that Blackstone's natural law doctrines are contradicted by his account of parliamentary sovereignty, see Pollock, Frederick, “A Plea for Historical Interpretation,” Law Quarterly Review 39 (1923): 165Google Scholar; Allen, C. K., Law in the Making, 5th ed. (London, 1951), pp. 427–28Google Scholar; Barker, Ernest, Essays on Government, 2d ed. (Oxford, 1951), p. 129Google Scholar; Dicey, A. V., Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, 9th ed. (London, 1939), pp. 41–42, 64Google Scholar. For the general claim that natural law theory was relatively unimportant to the Commentaries, see Barker, Ernest, Traditions of Civility (Cambridge, 1948), pp. 308–12Google Scholar. These issues receive more sympathetic treatment in Finnis, John N., “Blackstone's Theoretical Intentions,” Natural Law Forum 12 (1967): 163–83Google Scholar, Stourzh, Gerald, Alexander Hamilton and the Idea of Republican Government (Stanford, Calif., 1970), pp. 9–22, and Lobban (n. 27 above)Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Comm., 1:122–23.

⁴² Ibid., p. 123.

⁴³ Ibid., pp. 119-22.

⁴⁴ Ibid., p. 145.

⁴⁵ Ibid., p. 67.

⁴⁶ Ibid., pp. 64–67, and see 4:408–14.

⁴⁷ See Comm. (n. 13 above), vol. 4, chap. 33, where Blackstone offered a summary of English legal history. The novelty and sophistication of Blackstone's legal history has been recently canvassed in an important study by Willman, Robert, “Blackstone and the [Theoretical Perfection] of English Law in the Reign of Charles II,” Historical Journal 26 (1983): 39–70Google Scholar, though since challenged in parts by Cairns, John W., “Blackstone, the Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law,” Historical Journal 28 (1985): 711–17Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ See Pocock's, J. G. A. classic examination of this theme in The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law (Cambridge, 1957)Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ Comm., 1:233.

⁵⁰ Home, Henry, Lord Kames , Historical Law Tracts, 2 vols. (Edinburgh, 1758), 1:vGoogle Scholar.

⁵¹ Comm., 2:44.

⁵² See esp. ibid., 4:415–40.

⁵³ On the contributions of Hale and Selden to this historical understanding of common law, see Pocock, , The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law, chap. 7Google Scholar; and Tuck, Richard, Natural Rights Theories: Their Origin and Development (Cambridge, 1979), pp. 83–84, 133–39Google Scholar. Blackstone cited Hale, 's History of the Common Law of England (London, 1713 [posthumous]), ed. Gray, Charles M. (Chicago, 1971) throughout his chapter-length summary of English legal development, Comm., 4:407–43, and acknowledged Selden at Comm., 1:64Google Scholar.

⁵⁴ Comm., 1:67, 2:11.

⁵⁵ See, e.g., his discussion of copyholds, ibid., 2:147–50.

⁵⁶ Ibid., 4:409.

⁵⁷ Ibid., p. 442.

⁵⁸ Ibid., 1:64.

⁵⁹ Ibid., 1:69–71. The structure of this conception of common law as received customary practice is explored by Simpson, A. W. B. in “The Common Law and Legal Theory,” in Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence, ed. Simpson, , 2d ser. (Oxford, 1973)Google Scholar; and by Postema, Gerald J. in Bentham and the Common Law Tradition (Oxford, 1986), pp. 3–38Google Scholar. I am much indebted to these two important discussions.

⁶⁰ Comm. (n. 13 above), 4:442.

⁶¹ Wooddeson, Richard, Elements of Jurisprudence (London, 1783), p. 106Google Scholar.

⁶² Barrington, Daines, Observations on the More Ancient Statutes … with an Appendix being a proposal for new modelling the Statutes (1766; 3d ed., London, 1769), pp. 446–47Google Scholar.

⁶³ Symonds, Arthur, The Mechanics of Law Making (London, 1835), pp. 74–75Google Scholar.

⁶⁴ See, e.g., his discussion of ejectments at Comm., 3:205–6.

⁶⁵ Ibid., p . 265.

⁶⁶ Ibid., pp. 267–68. See also 2:288–89 and 3:329, where Blackstone again emphasized the need for law to accommodate swift property exchange in a commercial society.

⁶⁷ Ibid., 1:160.

⁶⁸ Bentham, , A Fragment on Government (n. 15 above), p. 480Google Scholar. Bentham was not alone among contemporary readers in thinking that Blackstone formulated a misleadingly broad statement of parliament's legislative powers; see, e.g., Sedgwick, James, Remarks Critical and Miscellaneous on the Commentaries of Sir William Blackstone (London, 1800), p. 126Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ Comm., 1:46.

⁷⁰ Ibid., p. 161. Blackstone further explained that this conception of sovereign legislative authority entailed a restrictive reading of the controversial common law doctrine associated with Coke that “acts of parliament contrary to reason are void.” See his discussion of the common law rules for the construction of statutes at p. 91.

⁷¹ Ibid., pp. 161–62. Blackstone's concern to combat political radicalism has been suggested as the central intention of the Commentaries in two recent accounts: see Willman (n. 47 above), pp. 68–70; and Katz, Stanley N., in Blackstone, William, Commentaries on the Laws of England: A Facsimile of the first edition of 1765–1769, 4 vols. (Chicago, 1979), 1:x (editorial introduction)Google Scholar.

⁷² See, e.g., Dicey, , Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (n. 40 above), pp. 41–48Google Scholar.

⁷³ Comm. (n. 13 above), 1:10.

⁷⁴ Ibid., pp. 416–17.

⁷⁵ Ibid., p. 365. See also 2:342–43, where Blackstone again advances the argument with regard to the failed legislative attempts to regulate “alienation by deed” since “the disuse of the old Saxon custom of transacting all conveyances at the county court.”

⁷⁶ Ibid., 4:3.

⁷⁷ Ibid., pp. 1–19 (on the “Nature of Crimes and Punishments”).

⁷⁸ DeLolme, Jean Louis, The Constitution of England, or an Account of the English Government (1771; reprint, London, 1775), p. 161.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Comm., 3:350, 379.

⁸⁰ Ibid., p. 380.

⁸¹ Ibid., pp. 379–80, and 1:269–70.

⁸² Ibid., 3:379–81.

⁸³ Ibid., p. 379.

⁸⁴ Bentham, , A Fragment on Government (n. 68 above), p. 407Google Scholar.

⁸⁵ Comm. (n. 13 above), 3:380.

⁸⁶ Ibid., p. 82.

⁸⁷ Between 1663 and 1776, the number of offenses Parliament placed under the summary jurisdiction of the justices increased threefold, from 70 to over 200; see Landau, Norma, The Justices of the Peace, 1679–1760 (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1984), p. 246Google Scholar.

⁸⁸ Comm., 4:280–82. The issues raised by Blackstone's protest are examined in Landau, esp. pt. 4.

⁸⁹ Comm., 4:349–50.

⁹⁰ Ibid., 1:365.

⁹¹ Hale (n. 53 above), pp. 35–36.

⁹² Comm., 4:420.

⁹³ Ibid., 4:438–40, and 439n. This was the time of only the “theoretical perfection” of the law on account of the “great practical oppression” of Charles II's reign. For a fuller treatment, see Willman (n. 47 above).

⁹⁴ See Comm., 4:427, where the phrase is used, after Hale, in reference to the consolidation of “the distributive justice of the kingdom” secured in the reign of Edward I; see 4:425; and Hale, pp. 101–2.

⁹⁵ See “Blackstone's Letter to Mr. Richmond at Sparsholt (1745),” reprinted in Harvard Law Review 32 (1918–1919): 975–76Google Scholar (spelling modernized).

⁹⁶ Comm. (n. 13 above), 1:10.

⁹⁷ Ibid., 3:268.

⁹⁸ Ibid.

⁹⁹ Ibid., p. 267.

¹⁰⁰ Ibid., 1:4–6.

¹⁰¹ Ibid., p. 9.

¹⁰² Ibid., pp. 10–11 (emphasis added).

¹⁰³ See nn. 24–28 above.

¹⁰⁴ Comm., 1:9.

¹⁰⁵ Bentham, , A Fragment on Government (n. 15 above), p. 413Google Scholar. For the attempts in the eighteenth century to use the universities to revive legal education, see Holdsworth, , A History of English Law (n. 33 above), 12:77–101Google Scholar; and Hanbury, H. G., The Vinerian Chair and Legal Education (Oxford, 1958), pp. 321–37Google Scholar. Blackstone's considerable efforts to secure and exploit the Vinerian chair are explored by Sutherland, Lucy in “William Blackstone and the Legal Chairs at Oxford,” in Evidence in Literary Scholarship: Essays in Memory of James Marshall Osborn, ed. Wellek, Rene and Ribeiro, Alvaro (Oxford, 1979), pp. 229–40Google Scholar; and by Barton, J. L. in “Legal Studies,” in The History of the University of Oxford: The Eighteenth Century, ed. Sutherland, L. S. and Mitchell, L. G. (Oxford, 1986), pp. 600–605Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁶ Comm. (n. 13 above), 1:127.

¹⁰⁷ Simpson, , “The Rise and Fall of the Legal Treatise” (n. 27 above), p. 658Google Scholar; Kennedy (n. 25 above), p. 371. See also the nineteenth-century assessments cited above at nn. 8–12 above.

¹⁰⁸ On the development of parliamentary government during William's reign, see Carter, Jennifer, “The Revolution and the Constitution,” in Britain after the Glorious Revolution, ed. Holmes, Geoffrey (London, 1969), pp. 39–58Google Scholar. For the resulting increase in legislation, see Horwitz, Henry, Policy and Politics in the Reign of William III (Manchester, 1977), p. 325Google Scholar; and Innes, Joanna and Styles, John, “The Crime Wave: Recent Writing on Crime and Criminal Justice in Eighteenth Century England,” Journal of British Studies 25 (1986): 420–30Google Scholar. This parliamentary lawmaking receives fuller analysis by Joanna Innes and John Styles in their “The Bloody Code in Context: Eighteenth Century Criminal Legislation Reconsidered: A Report of Work in Progress” (December, 1984, typescript). The author is greatly indebted to Innes and Styles for permitting him to examine their study.

¹⁰⁹ Thomas, P. D. G., The House of Commons in the Eighteenth Century (Oxford, 1971), p. 61Google Scholar.

¹¹⁰ Sullivan, Francis Stoughton, An Historical Treatise on the Feudal Law, and the Constitution and Laws of England (London, 1772), p. 7Google Scholar.

¹¹¹ Philip Yorke, Lord Hardwicke speech to the House of Lords, cited in William Holdsworth 11:374.

¹¹² Comm., 1:11; Huntingford, John, The State of the Statute Laws Considered (London, 1796), p. 7Google Scholar.

¹¹³ Hargrave, Francis, ed., A Collection of Tracts, Relative to the Law of England (London, 1787), pp. xl–xliGoogle Scholar.

¹¹⁴ Romilly, Samuel, Memoirs of the Life of Sir Samuel Romilly, written by himself, with a selection of his Correspondence, 2d ed., 3 vols. (London, 1840), 1:72Google Scholar.

¹¹⁵ Huntingford, p. 26.

¹¹⁶ Hay, Douglas, “Property, Authority and the Criminal Law,” in Albion's Fatal Tree, by Hay, Douglaset al. (London, 1975), p. 19Google Scholar. The now voluminous literature on eighteenth-century crime and criminal justice is helpfully surveyed by Innes and Styles, “The Crime Wave.” For further discussions of the legislative practice manifest in the penal acts, see the contributions by Thompson, E. P., Whigs and Hunters: The Origin of the Black Act (London, 1975)Google Scholar; Langbein, John H., “Albion's Fatal Flaws,” Past and Present, no. 97 (1983), pp. 96–120Google Scholar; and especially the exemplary treatment by Beattie, J. M., Crime and the Courts in England, 1660–1800 (Princeton, N.J., 1986), chaps. 9 and 10Google Scholar. Outside the area of penal law, the scholarship on Hanoverian parliamentary lawmaking is dominated by the research of Sheila Lambert; see her Bills and Acts: Legislative Procedure in Eighteenth-Century England (Cambridge, 1971)Google Scholar, and Lambert, Sheila, ed., House of Commons Sessional Papers of the Eighteenth Century, facsimile edition, 147 vols. (Wilmington, Del., 1975–1976), vol. 1, Introduction and List, 1715–60Google Scholar.

¹¹⁷ Bentham Manuscripts, c. 1775, draft on “Punishment in alienam personam,” University College, London, Box CXL, fol. 92.

¹¹⁸ Debate over reform of the penal law, however, did generate more ambitious programs of constructive legislative action than in other areas of law. Lieberman (n. 17 above) attempts to delineate these differences, chap. 10.

¹¹⁹ Romilly, Samuel, Observations of a Late Publication, intitled, Thoughts on Executive Justice (London, 1786), p. 14Google Scholar.

¹²⁰ Foster, Michael, A Report of some Proceedings on the Commission of Oyer and Terminer … to which are Added Discourses Upon a Few Branches of the Crown Law (London, 1762), p. 299Google Scholar.

¹²¹ Pocock, J. G. A., “Burke and the Ancient Constitution: A Problem in the History of Ideas,” Historical Journal 3 (1960): 125–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹²² William Murray, Omychund v. Barker (1744), in Atkyns, John Tracy, Reports of Cases argued and determined in the High Court of Chancery, ed. Sanders, Francis William, 3 vols. (London, 1794), 1:33.Google Scholar

¹²³ For a characteristic drawing of this conclusion, see Francis Hargrave's introductory comments to his edition of Hale's, MatthewConsiderations touching the Amendment or Alteration of Laws, in Hargrave, , ed. (n. 112 above), pp. xxxvi–xliGoogle Scholar.

¹²⁴ Francis Bacon, De Augmentis Scientiarum (English trans.), bk. 8, chap. 3, title 1, in The Works of Francis Bacon, ed. Spedding, James, Ellis, Robert Leslie, and Heath, Douglas Denon, 14 vols. (London, 1857–1874), 5:88–103Google Scholar. See also Bacon, 's “Memorial touching the Review of Penal Laws and the Amendment of the Common Law,” and Proposition … touching the Compiling and Amendment of the Laws of England, in The Works of Bacon, 12:84–86 and 13:61–67Google Scholar. For fuller treatment of Bacon's proposals, see the valuable account by Shapiro, Barbara J. in “Sir Francis Bacon and the Mid-seventeenth Century Movement for Law Reform,” American Journal of Legal History 24 (1980): 331–62Google Scholar, and “Codification of the Laws in Seventeenth-Century England,” Wisconsin Law Review, 1974, pp. 428–65Google Scholar.

¹²⁵ Hargrave, pp. xxxix–xli.

¹²⁶ Wynne, Edward, Eunomus: Or, Dialogues concerning the Law and Constitution of England, 4 vols. (London, 1774), 3:332–34Google Scholar. For similar recommendations of statute reform, not cited in the text, see: Burn, Richard, The Justice of the Peace and Parish Officer (1754), 9th ed., 3 vols. (London, 1764), 3:567–68Google Scholar; Wood, Thomas, An Institute of the Laws of England, or The Laws of England in their Natural Order, according to Common Use (1720), 4th ed., corrected (Dublin, 1724), p. iiiGoogle Scholar; Wooddeson, (n. 61 above), Elements of Jurisprudence, pp. 35–36Google Scholar; Paley, William, The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy (London, 1785), pp. 442–43Google Scholar; and Huntingford (n. 111 above).

¹²⁷ For some typical uses of the Commentaries in these terms, see Eden, William, Principles of Penal Law (London, 1771), p. 58nGoogle Scholar; Rayner, John, Observations of the Statutes relating to the Stamp Duties (London, 1786), pp. xxv–xxviGoogle Scholar; Zouch, Henry, Observations upon a Bill … to punish by Imprisonment and Hard Labour (London, 1779), title pageGoogle Scholar.

¹²⁸ Bacon, , Proposition … touching the Compiling and Amendment of the Laws of England, in Works of Bacon, 12:84Google Scholar.

¹²⁹ Barrington (n. 62 above), pp. 497–500.

¹³⁰ Maitland's phrase, cited above at n. 9.

¹³¹ See the judgments of Sir Francis Buller, J., in Lickbarrow v. Mason (1787), in Dunford, Charles and East, Edward Hyde, Reports of Cases argued and determined in the Court of King's Bench, 8 vols. (London, 1817), 2:73Google Scholar; and of Bell, George Joseph in Commentaries on the Laws of Scotland and the Principles of Mercantile Jurisprudence, 2d ed. (Edinburgh, 1810), pp. ix–x.Google Scholar

¹³² Burke, Edmund, “Report from the Committee of the House of Commons … on the Trial of Warren Hastings” (1794), in The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, 8th ed., 12 vols. (Boston, 1884), 11:84Google Scholar.

¹³³ Lieberman (n. 17 above) attempts to set out this case in detail, chaps. 11 and 13. For a summary account of Bentham's initial engagement with Blackstone and common law theory, see the editorial introduction by Burns, and Hart, to A Comment on the Commentaries and A Fragment on Government (n. 15 above), pp. xix–xxivGoogle Scholar, and Lieberman, 's “From Bentham to Benthamism,” Historical Journal 28 (1985): 202–5Google Scholar.

¹³⁴ Speeches of Henry Lord Brougham … with Historical Introductions, 4 vols. (Edinburgh, 1838), 2:287Google Scholar.