We cannot acknowledge the correctness of the conclusions at which Mr. Plowden arrives by the above arguments. The proper meaning of the words, " acts, statutes and laws," and the construction they were intended by the Statute of Henry VIII. to bear, seems to us to include the written as well as the unwritten law ; that is, both the statute and the common law. The former desig- nated as " acts and statutes," and the latter properly described by the term " laws." Thus the words, " acts, statutes and laws," include both the written and common laws. In the Statute of Edward VI., which repealed the Statute of Henry VIII., and revived the com- mon law, the word laws is omitted, and ads and statutes only referred to; and as to the other argument, that the expression, " sentences, words and terms," used in the Statute of Henry VIII., as the occasion of " doubts, ambiguities and questions," can only be applicable to written laws, we do not see that the expression is not equally applicable to the common law, which, though frequently called the unwritten law, is yet, in fact, written and contained in the books of our law authors, and is quite as likely as the statutes to be the occasion of doubts, ambiguities and questions.
' 13 Elizabeth, 0. 8., § 9. " Mr. Plowden (p. 66), in commenting upon the conclusions to which Sir Edward Coke arrives, says, " The learned commentator upon these statutes of usury appears to have substantially contra- dicted his own opinion upon the abrogation of the common law.