(305) by the testator, and annexed to, and to be taken as part of a testament, by which its dispositions are explained, added to, or altered.* 2 Bl. Com. 500. 4 Kent's Com. 531. 1 Steph. Com. 545.-A testamentary disposition subsequent to a will, and by which the will is altered, explained, added to, subtracted from, or confirmed by way of republication, but in no case totally revoked. 2 Wooddes. Lect. 284. De Grey, C. J. 3 Wils. 513. For general purposes, a codicil is considered as a will, the distinction between them existing only in their relation to each other. 1 Powell on Devises, 20, note (4). 1 Steph. Com. 545. By the English Statute of Wills, 7 Will. IV. and 1 Vict. c. 26, the term will is to be taken as including a codicil. And the rule is the same in the state of New-York. 2 Rev. Stat. [68, § 71,] 12, § 78. So that a codicil must be executed with the same formalities, and proved in the same manner as the will itself. 4 Kent's Com. 531. See 7 Hill's (N. Y.) Rep. 346. 12 Gill & Johns. 288. 14 B. Monroe's R. 333. United States Digest, Will. ** The name, and, to some extent, the modern use of a codicil, are taken from the codicillus of the Roman law, which, however, was, in many respects, a very different instrument. See Codicillus. Two definitions of the term are given in the old dictionaries. The last in order is substantially the modern definition, but the first, and apparently the preferred one, is in the following words: "A codicil is the will or testament of a man, concerning that which he would have done after his death, without the appointing of an executor." Termes de la Ley. "A codicil is the same with a testament, but that it is without an executor." Cowell. Blount. This definition seems to be modelled after the idea of a codicillus in the Roman law, which was merely an informal, and subordinate, but distinct and independent species of will. See Codicillus. Its peculiar feature, however, is that which denies to a codicil the appointment of an executor. Dr. Wooddeson observes on this point, as if in explanation of this peculiarity, that codicils were never thought to require the appointment of a new executor to carry them into execution. 2 Wooddes. Lect. 284. In this view, no doubt, we may still say with propriety that a codicil is "without the appointment of an executor." But that the old definition signified something more is obvious from VOL I. the language of Swinburne, who expressly lays down the position that a codicil does not admit the appointment of an executor, and bases upon that circumstance the peculiar and principal distinction between it and a will. Swinburne on Wills, part 1, § 5, n. 3, p. 13. It is hardly necessary to say that this doctrine of Swinburne's is not now law. 2 Wooddes. Lect. ub. sup. A contraction of commune. Co'er; a commoner. Les co'es; the commons. Kelham. A corruption of ceo, (this) constantly occurring in the tract called Fet Assaver, (q. v. passim).