New-York tribune., 1884-02-25
]tR. FIELDS CIVIL CODE.

| lR. FIELDS CIVIL CODE.
| The common law, as it exists to-day in England
and America, is the greatest product OF liberty
and modern civilization. Gradually, through
hundreds of years, 1t has been taking shape and
growing toward perfection. Adapting itself to
the changing circumstances of human affairs IN
different generations, expanding to meet the
requirements of invention and discovery and all
the developments of the industrial arts and
| sciences it has in all modern times, at least,
more or less perfectly reflected the popular
sense of Justice and has been the best exponent
| and justification of free government. but tLls
very fexibility has in time come to be a subject
for criticism and objection. It's necessary
cOrollary is uncertainty to greater or less
degree Where judicial determination is to be
| based upon preccdents extracted by lawyer and
Judge from the whole range of legal authorities
running back to the times of Lord Coke or
further, there must frequently be an element OF
| uncertainty as to the conclusion. The late
James r. Brady once quantity joined another
truth with this in saying: a lawyers opinion
" is never worth a straw, unless 1t is paid for;
" and then it isn't worth anything until it has
| " been sustained by the highest appellate
| court"
Can this difficulty of uncertainty in the law
be obviated2 Can the settled principles of the
law be declared in statutory form so as to avoid
controversy without doing injustice The
friends of cOdifcatiOn think that they can, and
for nearly half century they have been urging
that as the sovereign remedy for most of the
evils of burdensome litigation and the un-
certainty of the law This opinion led to the
| int bn of Oi
the provisions for the making of such cOdifca
ton of our laws. The Legislature carried out
the directions of the Constitution in that
respect appointing commissioners to do the
work. But the result of their labors upon the
common law was not laid before the Legislature
until nearly twenty years afterward, and then
| there was found to be a stronger sentiment
against it than in its favor This adverse senti-
ment was powerful enough to prevent the Civil
| Code from seeing the light for ten or twelve
years Twice since then the vetOes of two
! Governors have been all that prevented its
enactment. It's opponents have year by year
become more active and earnest in their oppOs
! ton and have taken more pains to point out
what they considered would be the evils to flow
J nomits enactment. They have urged that was
condemned on scientific principles; by the
! teachings of actual experience and by pre-
! pOndeIating weight of the opinions of juristS,
iudges and statesmen; that, instead of
diminishing, it would increase litigation that
more uncertainty would arise over the con-
struction of its language than over the prOpO-
stions of law il was intended to settle; and
more than all, that it would work injustice,
because its nfexibe character would render it
incapable of meeting the infinite variety Of
circumstances in industrial and business affairs
about which new questions would constantly
arise.
The friends of the Civil Code claim that 1t
goes before the Legislature this year with the
brightest prospects of enactment. Its
opponents, on the other hand, are alert and de-
tcrmined to defeat it so thoroughly as to destroy
it. The members of the Legislature will hear
many arguments and receive many documents
upon both sides of the question but we doubt
if all the others will be of much real value to
the inquiring legislator as the information
upon the subject that is contained in this
mornings issue of The TRIBUNE. This is the
first successful effort that has been made to get
a full expression of opinion on the cOdificatiOn
of the common law from those best qualified to
give 1.-THE lawyers of the State. From the
manner in which the inquiries were sent out these
opinions may be said thoroughly to represent
the sentiment of the entire legal profession OF
the State. The results will bear careful
study. One of the most striking facts about the
returns as tabulated is that the supporters and
opponents of common law cOdifcatiOn seem quite
evenly divided in numbers. But there are some
indications much more significant. While there
are many lawyers of eminenoe who advocate
cOdification in general and favor the enactment |
of the Field Code, yet the larger number of the |
men of experience and distinction write them
serves down among the opposition This is
certainly true of those in this city and vicinity.
The almost unanimous voice of the New York |
and Brooklyn judges against cOdifcatiOn in any |
form cannot be lightly dsregarded. Certainly |
few persons are so well qualified to pass dpon
the question. That so large proportion of the |
members of the profession are in favor
of codifcation is to be partly explained because
IL would be much easier for them to adapt |
themselves to the exigencies OF new system.
The figures show majority OF 70 In favor OF
codiication. But In the determination of the
present question before the Legislature, 1t Is
much more important to notice that there is
majority of 3S2 against Mr. Fields code. For
the learning, cearness of statement and mental
grasp of the subjects displayed by Mr.. Field,
there are expressions Of admiration on the part
Of those most emphatically opposed TO the
principle and not a few of this number declare
their belief that the work has been as well dOne
as 1t is possible for any living person to do it.
l.. Eaff