The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1878-03-14
The Revi.ion of eur statutes.


I contains, among others of like chaTac-
teristics, the following section:
1.-The first session of the Legislature
! under this Constitution shall provide
| for revising, dIgesi;Bg and publishing
the laws, civil and criminal; and like
revision, digest and pub ication may be
made every tep years thereafter; pro
rided, that in the adoption OF and CIV
ing effect to any such digest or revis-
ion, the Legislature shall not be limit
Ell by sections 30 and SO of this arti-
c e." Constitution of 1876, article >,
section %
This section is drawn up in what
may be termed convention English, "
IN analogy to the Pigeon English in use
among the Chinese. Those who de-
vised and enacted it probably meant
that the Legislature, not the first ses-
SON of the Legislature, should cause
the public and general and the public
snd local-not the private, acts OF
Texas, to be revised and digested in
order that the revision and digest
might be enacted and promulgated as
the statutory law of the land by the
next Legislature. Why they inscrted
the surplus words ''under this Consti-
ton" and made section SO to be inop.
erative as to the contemplated re-
vision when it is clearly lnapplicable
thereto it is difficult to discover. In
deed, section Sc in this connection only
shows on its face that they who sought
to copy it verbatim from the three pre-
vious Constitutions of which it formed
NnrAA Il - l-Y q ! H.
tween revised" and "revived." (See
Constitution of 1915, al tIcle Z, section
%; Constitution of 1867, article z,
section 25, ard Constitution of 1869,
article -, section 1S)
Though the convention probably
meant, as has been suggested, to have
only the public and general and pHb
lie and local statutes revised and di-
gestea, by employing the sweeping
words, "the laws, civil and criminal, "
it made it obligatory upon the Legis-
lature to provide for the revision of the
private (often mistermed speclaD
statutes also. By so doing it gave the
future Legislatures of Texas more pow
er over railway and other private cor
p0rations, than they would have under
what is known as the Granuer decis-
ions of the Supreme court of the
United States.
The Legislature of 1875, according
ly, enacted San act to provide for
revising, dIgesting and publishing the
laws, civil and criminal, of the State
of Texas" (See Gen. Laws of 1876,
ch. 60, PIP. 80, 59) This act provides
for a commission of five, and requires
them to revise ''all the general statutes
of the State in force up to the time
they shall make their repOrt"-or in
other words, it fails to provide for a
revision of the public and local acts at
all, not y speak of the private acts.
Wniie it falls short Of compliance
with the express requirement of the
Constitution in these particulars, it
goes beyond the Constitution in an
other: it requires them to make 'mar
9ipal and foot notes and explanations
A commission was accordingly ap-
pointed by the Governor, to whom We
are chiefly indebted fer the Constitu-
ton of 1876. Though they are paid
"the same salary as district judges for
tie time they are necessarily engaged IN
the performance Of their acork," which
seems to have been construed to mean
that they should be paid for such Incl
dental work as may be done by them
separately and not for the time only
when they sit jointly (no doubt many
of our legislators would like TO have
the same liberal construction adopted
as to themselves and to draw their
per diem all the time while in ofIice), it
is stated, and it is believed truly, that
they will have their revision ready and
in print by the time that our next Leg
islature assemblies.
1t is absolutely certain that such
revision and digest as they will pre-
sent will be a decided improvement
upon the crude and inconsistent mass
If public and general acts we now have.
Indeed, our statutes are so loosely and
clumsily worded, even when not in
consistent, that any commissioners who
could read and write, and who would
lake the trouble to read and discuss
them together, could not fail to mate
rally improve them.
In view of the foregoing PROPOSE
tions 1t is incumbent upon every good
citizen to see TO it that each candidate
for whom he votes at the approaching
election is pledged to the adoption of
the revision and digest of the commits
sion as whole and without any other
alteration than in the way of correcting
clerical errors. We must do so as
matter of self-defeuse. We cannot af-
ford to have the revision and digest
presented mangled and made ridicu-
Iously inconsistent by what are styled
amendments, prepared (by such mel
as generally get themselves made legis-
lators in Texas without first reading
and comprehendlng it as a whole.
The crude and undigested mass. of
statutes now in force is fertile source
of wrong. Loose legislation has
caused even our Supreme Court to re-
sort to loose construction of our bad
Constitution and almost equally bad
| statutes.
We must avail OURSELVES of the op-
portunity of self-proteciiun now offered
us by taking steps to have the revision
now in progress adopted entire.