[k] Tiraboschi, t. iv. p. 38; t. v. p. 55.
[m] Tiraboschi, t. v. Vaissette, Hist. de Languedoc, t. ii. p. 517; t. iii. p. 527; t. iv. p. 504.
[n] Duck, de Usu Juris Civilis, 1. ii. c. 6.
[o] Idem, 1. ii. 2.
[p] Duck, 1. ii. c. 5, s. 30, 31. Fleury, Hist. du Droit François, p. 74 (prefixed to Argou, Institutions au Droit François, edit. 1787), says that it was a great question among lawyers, and still undecided (i.e. in 1674), whether the Roman law was the common law in the pays coutumiers, as to those points wherein their local customs were silent. And, if I understand Denisart, (Dictionnaire des Décisions, art. Droit-écrit,) the affirmative prevailed. It is plain at least by the Causes Célèbres, that appeal was continually made to the principles of the civil law in the argument of Parisian advocates.
[q] Crevier, Hist. de l'Université de Paris, t. i. p. 316; t. ii. p. 275.
[r] Johan. Salisburiensis, apud Selden ad Fletam, p. 1082.
[] Selden, ubi supra, p. 1095-1104. This passage is worthy of attention. Yet, notwithstanding Selden's authority, I am not satisfied that he has not extenuated the effect of Bracton's predilection for the maxims of Roman jurisprudence. No early lawyer has contributed so much to form our own system as Bracton; and if his definitions and rules are sometimes borrowed from the civilians, as all admit, our common law may have indirectly received greater modification from that influence, than its professors were ready to acknowledge, or even than they knew. A full view of this subject is still, I think, a desideratum in the history of English law, which it would illustrate in a very interesting manner.
[t] Duck, De Usu Juris Civilis, 1. i. c. 87.
[] Gravina, Origines Juris Civilis, p. 196.