152 BINNEY'S CASE.

other cases where the language of a legislative enactment is clear,
explicit, and unambiguous, a court of justice cannot depart from
its sense as expressed; and if its directions cannot be executed in
the manner prescribed, whether the defect proceed from a mistake,
or the negligent inattention of the legislature, no court of justice
can supply the deficiency. (f) It has beed said, that, in England,
the judges have often demanded what the law was, and how a
statute should be expounded, of the lords in parliament, (g) It is
evident, however, that in those cases the court has had its doubts
removed and the ambiguity cleared away, not by any extrinsic
evidence; but by the legislators themselves, responding either as
a legislative body, or as the supreme court in the last resort. In
the celebrated case concerning literary property, a question arose
as to what was the common law before the passage of the statute
for securing a copy-right to authors; (h) and in casting about in
every direction to ascertain that, it was argued, by several of the
judges, that the statute itself, as well as the proceedings of the
parliament by which it was enacted, afforded proof of what was
generally understood, at that time, to be the common law upon the
subject, (i)

But every species of evidence may be introduced to show what
the common law is now, or has been at any time past; because
that part of our code is made up of reasonable principles and
established usages, the existence of which, in the absence of express
adjudications and records, can only be shewn in that way. (j)
And, therefore, for that purpose, the judges had recourse to the
history of that act, they adverted to the petition on which it was
introduced into the house of commons, as found on the journals of

application at the land office for a proclamation warrant to affect the land of John
Hamilton, after a disclosure of the facts existing in the said case by the petition of
the said John Hamilton preferred to this house—Yeas 61, nays 2. So it was resolved
in the affirmative.

Immediately after which an act was passed, reciting that, whereas, it may happen
that facts may be disclosed by petitions preferred to the General Assembly, of which
advantage may be taken, to the injury of the party petitioning; therefore it was
enacted, that whenever a petition shall be presented to the legislature by any per-
son to confirm his title, the claim of such person shall not be invalidated by any thing
cantained therein, until the end of the session; provided that nothing therein contained
should prevent or delay a suit or execution. 1794, ch. 45.

(f) Weale v. West Middlesex Water-Works Company, 1 Jac. & Walk. 371.—
(g) Arth. Blackamore's case, 8 Co. 314; The Earl of Shaftesbury's case, 1 Mod. 153.
(k) 8 Anne, c. 10.—(f) Millar v. Taylor, 4 Burr. 2305.—(j) The King v. Pasmore,
3 T. R. 245; 1 Blac. Com. 68.