In the customary rush to create exciting new bills, the government once more lost the chance to repeal a list of legal curiosities. They include puritanical measures passed by Oliver Cromwell, which still forbid the consumption of mince pies on Christmas Day. The measures are usually written off as redundant because of a legal argument known as the "doctrine of implied repeal", but the British tradition of common law based on precedent could allow a determined litigant to make a challenge.
"All these laws were considered beneficial at the time they were passed," said Jonathan Coad, head of litigation at the London specialist lawyers Swan Turton. "We may think it is nonsense now, but there was a time when it mattered that no one was allowed to stand within 100 yards of the monarch if they were not wearing stockings, hose or socks."
Other indignities to royals feature prominently in the acts most often cited. It has been illegal since the reign of George I (1660-1727) for a commoner's pet to have carnal knowledge of an animal belonging to the monarch, for example a corgi. It can still be construed as treason to stick on a postage stamp with the monarch's head upside down.
"In most cases, the implied repeal argument would probably work," said Mr Coad. "Whatever people in York may think about Scotsmen with bows and arrows, they would have a hard time avoiding several centuries of homicide acts."