ABSTRACT
Precedent covers everything said or done which furnishes a rule for subsequent practice, especially in matters of form or ceremony. The decision of a court may unite the character of a Judicial Precedent with the character of an expression of wise thought or of sound morals, but often these characters are separated. The idea of Judicial Precedents was therefore familiar to the Roman Law, at least at some periods of its development. In France, as in Germany, it would seem that decisions of courts are not binding precedents, even on inferior courts. In England, and in the countries where the English Common Law prevails, a very different theory as to Judicial Precedents exists. To decide cases is the necessary function of a judge; it is of the essence of judgeship; but whether a judge can establish precedents or not is not of the essence of judgeship.
