Definition
A writ of homine eligendo (Latin: "for choosing a man") was a writ in old English law directed to a corporation, commanding its members to elect a person to fill the office of seal-keeper for statutes merchant. Specifically, the writ issued when the individual previously responsible for keeping one part of the seal used to authenticate statutes merchant had died, and a replacement needed to be chosen. The writ compelled the corporation to act in making that selection, ensuring continuity in the administration of the statute merchant debt-enforcement mechanism.
Why It Matters in Research
This term is of narrow but specific historical significance. Researchers encountering it will almost certainly be working in medieval or early modern English commercial law, particularly in connection with the statute merchant system established by the Statute of Acton Burnell (1283) and its successor, the Statute of Merchants (1285). The writ has no modern counterpart and did not survive into common law jurisdictions outside England.
The primary research trap is treating this as a general writ of election. It is not. Homine eligendo is functionally specific: it concerns the seal-keeping office tied to the statute merchant mechanism, not corporate elections broadly. Researchers looking at writs of election in other contexts should not conflate this with related writs such as mandamus directing corporate elections or other electoral writs.
Because the writ is tied to the statute merchant system, corpus connections run directly to commercial and debt law of the 13th and 14th centuries. If you encounter this term in a primary source, you are almost certainly looking at material touching on recognized debt obligations, merchant creditors, and the machinery by which royal courts enforced commercial instruments before modern contract and debt law developed.
The Registrum Omnium Brevium (Reg. Orig.), cited in both dictionary entries, is the primary historical source for the writ's form. Wharton's Law Lexicon is the secondary authority referenced. Both sources confirm the writ's content identically, suggesting the Black's second edition entry is a direct carry-forward rather than an independent scholarly revision.
Historical Dictionary Support
Both Black's Law Dictionary entries — the standard edition and the second edition supplemental — reproduce the definition in nearly identical language, differing only in minor typographical and formatting details. Neither source adds interpretive commentary beyond the functional description. This convergence signals that the compilers treated the term as settled, narrow, and primarily of antiquarian value even at the time of publication.
Neither entry elaborates on the procedural consequences of non-compliance with the writ, nor do they situate homine eligendo within the broader extinction of the statute merchant system. The statute merchant mechanism largely fell into disuse after the development of the recognizance and later common law debt instruments, which means the occasions for this writ to issue became vanishingly rare well before Black's first edition was published. Researchers should not expect to find this writ active in post-medieval practice.
Wharton's Law Lexicon, cited in both entries, treats the term similarly — as a historical specimen rather than a living instrument.
Jurisdictional Note
This writ was specific to English law and derived directly from the Statute of Acton Burnell and the Statute of Merchants. It did not transplant into American law, and no equivalent writ developed in other common law jurisdictions. Research use is confined to English legal history prior to the obsolescence of the statute merchant system.