[□=□] □
[lemma=□] □
[word=□] □
There are laws of the constitution , as , for example , the Bill of Rights , the Act of Settlement , and Habeas Corpus Acts , which are " written law , " found in the statute-books in other words , are statutory enactments . " / 3 / And this , it seems to me , is the nearest approach which has ever been made to the truth . It must be noted that under these two rules the Imperial Parliament does retain , and sometimes exerts the right to legislate in regard to matters which may greatly concern the prosperity of a Dominion , and also does in some respects seriously curtail both the legislative power of a Dominion Parliament and the executive power of a Dominion Cabinet . The first is the reign of Law : wherever the King 's writ runs , it is the symbol and messenger not of an arbitrary authority , but of rights shared by every citizen , and capable of being asserted and made effective by the tribunals of the land . Yet , when we turn our attention from the legal existence to the actual exercise of royal authority in England , we see these formidable prerogatives dwindled into mere ceremonies ; and in their stead , a sure and commanding influence , of which the constitution , it seems , is totally ignorant , growing out of that enormous patronage , which the increased extent and opulence of the Empire has placed in the disposal of the executive magistrate . Neither the King nor the Executive has anything to do with erecting courts of justice . Some means must , many Englishmen believe , be found for the diminution of evils which are under a large electorate the natural , if not the necessary , outcome of our party system . But if this power be placed in the hands of the Executive , the law will , it may be feared , be made subservient to the will of any political party which is for the moment supreme . The executive of England is in fact placed in the hands of a committee called the Cabinet .