The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1881-09-08
THE CODE.

was equal to period Of twenty years,
under the system of biennial sessions
of the Legislature. The laws were
scattered through ten volumes of session
acts. On some subjects they were
confused, and scarcely Ineligible 1t
was considered desirable TO have the
laws put in convenient shape, and made
plain. The State had published a
code in 1922 and again in 1910, and in
1848, and in 1857, and in 1871. The
code Of 1880 cost very little, compari-
lively. The code of 1857, when every
thing was cheap, cost about $27 900.
The codifers were paid $4,000, and
$500 acopy was paid for publishing the
code. The code Of 1871 cost more
than double this The code of 1880
cost only 81 80 copy, and the codifer
was paid So, 900 for what those of 1857
were paid SO, 900, and for the addition
al work Of citing the decisions of the
Supreme Court scattered through fifty
seven volumes Ct reports, applicable to
the various sections Of the code The
code of 1880 is a great convenience to
the people 1t contains the whole body
Of statute law of general application in
convenient and Ineligible shape. 1t
contains many useful forms for the
guidance of officers, and for the use of
the citizen, which were not embraced
by any former code. 1t has been said
by high authority that the improve
mems in the revenue Law alone are
worth annually to the State more than
the entire cost of the code. The scheme
of registration of voters contained in
the code, besides promoting convenience,
saves annually more than the whole cost
of the code. The cost of the system it
superseded was little, if anything, less
than $50, 900, annually, while under
the code it cannot much exceed, inolu-
ding the cost Of commissioners of cleo
ton, ten thousand dollars. This is an
annual saving Of some $4,000, for
which the people of the State are in.
debted to the code, to say nothing of
their relief, as far as possible under the
/ Constitution, from the odiOus system of
registration Of voters which it imposes
Resides these things, there are many
provisions in the code especially con.
/ trived to promote the interest of the
masses, and particularly the poor, that
class which needs the fostering care OF
the Legislature We could specify, but
it is needless, since objection has been
made TO very few of the 3185 sections
into which the code is DIVIDED. The
code was not a party measure, but q
work of ordinary legislation, in refer
ence to which there were 10 party
divisions but, if the Democratic party
was called to assume responsibility for
it, it might proudly point to the fact
that so few objections have been made
IL so extensive work, and they have
&c relation to the principles of the
/ party.
The two features of the code on which
/ the Republican Convention lately assem-
bled in this city attempted to get up a
rallying cry for the voters it hoped to
seduce ,'are the" landiord and tenant lar, "
and the .'bo,t ghiskev lar" Its plat
/ form demands the amendment OF the
I former, and the repeal of the latter.
&, 4gTL2t amendment of the act in relation
to landlord aha tenant is demanded is
not stated, but is left 10 conjecture.
There could be no greater absurdity
than to try to rally party by such
declarations as these. There is perhaps
+ Eo spbiectof practical Importance about
/ which views are more variant thai. with
reference to the legislation for the reg
ulation of the relation Of landlord and
tenant, employer and employee, and the
encouragement Of egticqltqre. This
has perplexed our people and their
representatives ever since the war, and
has engaged their attention, not as
partizans, but as citizens; and the
people of no party or race is agreed on
this subject
No doubt r! good men desire the
general good, but the difficulty is to
agree what will promote it, and the
Republican Convention has failed to
indicate its view on this subject, and
stopped with the vague declaration for
an amendment of the law. What
amendment Would it change the law,
by so diminishing the security of the
landlord for his rent, that the poor
man, white o. coloIeq viii not be able
, to rent land, and will be compelled by
the stress Of his situation to hire for
wages or work on shares? Now, none
are so poor but he may rent land, if he
will, because the law secures the land
lord as it secures the laborer and the
'cropper." Now, the humble day
laborer is invested by law with credit
equal TO his necessity for a home in
village or country, by the provision
which subjects to liability for rent
(nothipg elsel all that he has This as
for his benefit. Il makes him equal as to
this TO the capitalist. He may have no
money or friend to be surety for rent,
but the little he has, being liable for
rent, enables him, without money or
security to procure such home as he
needs and dssiFss, What simpler,
cheaper or better scheme has states
manship proposed to promote the indie
pendence and happiness of the poorest
of society !
As for The 'tpipt lew we have said
that it ought to be repealed, because the