The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1884-02-03
Revising and Compiling the
Laws.

SALT LAKE CITY, Feb. 2, 1884.
Herald:
at the sitting of the Legislature
two years ago, committee was ap-
pointed to revise and compile the
laws of the Territory, for which
they were to receive % day. They
were instructed "to revise and com.
pile all the laws OF the said Terri
tory, in force therein" repealed
laws and inconsistencies to be
"noted In the margin" of bill, the
bill, with the s'notes, as aforesaid,
and such recommendations as they
may deem wise" 10 be reported
early to the Epresent Legislature.
The committee did report early, but
instead of presenting the laws of
the Territory, revised ana compiled,
With marginal notes of inconsist-
encies and recommendations, the
Work they we're appointed to do,
they reported that they had made
those laws the basis of a superstruo-
ture of their own, which the recon-
mended to the Legislature. They
say, SIN prosecuting the work the
committee used the existing laws of
the Territory as the basis upon
which their work was to rest" They
further say that they Shave taken
the latest amendments cf the Cali
fornia law and applied them S. far
as applicable" They also acknow-
ledge that "the bill as presented is
not technically in accordance with
the act providing for this revision"
Well, rather not. They say, We
have our motives for making
the deviation" Undoubtedly. But
we will not enter into motives here.
Now, this all seems to me very
curious business. Instead Of revising
and compiling, the committee set
themselves to reconstruct, enlarge
and codify the law, and indeed to
prepare a new body Of law or the
consideration Of the Legislature.
Was it right for the committee to
do this? Is the Legislature under
any obligation to pay them 81 day
every day they employed them
selves in exceeding their instruc-
lions In this way? It appears to me
that the committee have done the
things they ought not to have done,
and left undone the things they
ought to have done, so far as their
instructions were concerned. / take
it that the proper work of q com,
mittee of revision and compilation
of the laws is to consolidate them as
to originals, amendments and addi-
tions, and arrange them in intellig-
ible and compact form, so as to show
that the laws already in existence
really are, and not what the revisers
and compilers think ought to be in
existence; to collect and condense in
one vOleme all the valid laws exist
ing in many statute books, not to
elaborate new ones, even on the
basis Of the old. But the committee
have the old laws, torn them all tC
| pieces, like an old building, and
used the material as the basis of
another building, of which they
have assumed to be the architects.
Now the base of a building is only a
small portion of it, and we may
therefore presume that the
old laws constitute only q
small portion of this new
structure, this committee-prepared
new body Of law. Was this course
of procedure anticipated by the Leg.
islature in appointing the commit
tee? Was it necessary? Was it adj
visable? Was it wise course? Was
it wise at this particular juncture,
with such governor rs we have, SO
fond Of his absolute veto, so thor.
Ough1y antagOnistic to the wishes OF
the people2 Very doubtful. Very
doubtful indeed. To tear the exist
ing body of laws all to pieces, and
build new body Of law upon the
debris, is not necessarily an evidence
of statesmanship, and much lees
necessarily so at this especial time
Change is not necessarily improve
mont. 1t is often exactly the re-
verse 1t Is possible, barely possible
that the changes made by the COM
mittee in this instance are improve.
ments, or will be by the time they
Il p0oS kuDeI u6tOlld1 oil uUAdJ cslO
prejudice. 1t is possible that they
are or will be quite the reverse OF
improvements. 1t may be that the
committee have done good work
though the likelihood is the other
way. But it is not the work they
were set to do by the Legislature
which appointed them, 1t is a work
Of their own devising. If the Leg.
islature considers the changes made
by the committee judicious and
concludes to adopt the same, very
good. But it should not be done
hastily. The subject should be
we'll considered in all its bearings,
and that is no small work. Better
not adopt, than adopt too hastily.
To make haste slowly is often the
best policy. If the committee
thought to steal march upon the
Legislature, it is the business Of the
Legislature not tn be caught nap.
ping. SALT LAKER