The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-07-02

puSleQ lnVVuku au my
alphabet, would be far better |
than our present clumsy system;
bat we are not willing to unleain |
what we have once learned, and to at
tack again the difficulties that we
have partly overcome. We may be
told that the evil Of the constant in
crease of law b roks must soon become |
wholly intolerable; but We are apt to |
saw that we can endure it for the let |
OF our little day. Like Louis Ky, We
saw, "Af err us, the 6eluge." We are |
bound down hand and foot by babit
aud custom, and we have no wish to
escsps from their thraldom. What
knowledge we have OF the law
is associated with leading and
other cases, and il we had the
same law srraDged in code every
thing would be novel and awkward TO
us. The expression and arrangement
of the laws might be simpler, but we
should have 10 leave old ways, have
to give a new direction 10 our studies
and submit to some inco nvenience. 1t
ia also true that this difficulties in the
wsv of codification are immense, and
that cod fication will not accomplish
all the brilliant results which the most
enthusiastic advocates OF this remedy
would have us believe. However that
NAV be, it is quite obvious that at no
yery distant day codjfication OF the
common law must be brought about
boh
IN ENGLAND AND IN THIS COUNTRY.
When Jeremy BenIhsm invented
the word "Oodification," aud con,
tended that the method denoted by it
should be practically realizsd, he wss
met with universal s'olm OF r,dlGule
and abuse. At present the friends OF
codification here and in England APP
near 10 be very nearly equal in num-
J hers to their adversalies. At this rate
there can be but one rest t. Indeed,
the posit;on OF the friends CT codilica-
ton is nece. sarily strengthened every
dav by the prodigious and uuex-
amnled increase of our law books,
which are slowly but surely pushing
the advocates of Judge made law to
the wall. The party favoring, codlh,,
| cation will probably eventually lind
: their surest allies in the Iaymen IN our
legislative bodies, W ho are naturally
inclined to believe that tie law may
: he greatly simplifed by statutory ar
l rapgement and condensation, and who
3 ara not fully aware of the fact that,
t howeyere X pressed, the law must in the
3 nature of things, always be one OF the
2 most extensive, complex and difficult
1 subjects that can engage the human
a mind, a subject upon which no one
: can have especial knowledge without
many wears of severe study. DeFoc-
/, oueyille in writing his Democracy IN
: AMERICA said that, being an arts ocrst
y by birth and education, he looked
+ upon the progress OF Democracy with
n kind Of d. cad. But instead OF trying
o TO keep back the revolution by assert
!. ing that he would never consent TO it.
It he undertook the study and analysis
l. of a principle whose ultimate trl
n umph he believed was Il suled. The
r, question as to the feasibility and pro
'f prietv OF codifying the law has beer
l. discussed with go much zeal and abil
d ity in England, in Germany, and II
d the State Of New York, that it woult
re hardly bs possible to say anything neV
n On the subject. For myself, | shal
u at empt nothing OF the kind, butshal
10 becontented with endeavoring to max
OF a more humble contribution to IN
re general topic. At the annual meetin
Id of the American Bar Association hel
Y. in the year 1884 COMMITTEES was az
1e pointed to consider whether
OF THE PRESENT DELAY AND UNCERrAlNT
o. IN JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION
ID, cau be lessened, and if go by whf
a means" The committee was con
CO nosed of Mr.. David Dudley Field an
1t Mr.. John F. Dillon of New York, NJ
o. lanes G. Broadhead OF Missouri, M
e5 Richard IT. Merrick of the District
he Columbi1, and Mr.. Edward j. Phell
is. of Vermont. Before any report WI
on made Mr.. MeIriCk died. The malori'
yes Of the survivors of the committee r
40 ported to the last meeting oil the ass
ie- citation, recommending, among oth
things, that "the law itself shall
ED reduced, as far as possible, to the torl
Of statute" The report was approve
Iad nv all the members of the commute
MO save by Mr.. Phelpe, who dissented
No This point. AS might have been @
we pected, the report excited an animate
in discussion, and eventually the subl.e
orc WAS recommitted and laid over tor II
be consideration at the next meeting,
,an he held in the month of August in q
no. uretent ysor, at which time. we m
his suppose the deputants will be tul
r ne nrepsred TO maintain their sveral pc
ed. tons to the utmost o. 'heH ap'li'
of After the accomplishment OF t
a Italian unity commission Tor I
m. formation OF code was appointed
he the % h day OF February, 1869. L
ont code prepared by it went into effect
The the let day of January, 1866. IL
,ro. chiefly based on the civil law, a
nod contains 2l59 articles.
- IN RUSSIA
Vic. the first code was published IN IL
mo In 100 Peter the Great took steps
;oS have a new code compiled. All
ono wards many commissions were
70 nointed. but the immense labor
ba not completed until 1882, when
otS code now in force, containing so
uch lave, was published IN several Volun
'nlv In Russian Poland the Code OF
en- uoleon, introduced in 1908, remains
nav force; while Finland, united to kuf
rac. in 1909, retains the Swedish Code
,sed 1876. -, !
' re- THE CONSTITUTION OF GREECE OF
wey requires that the laws shall be codlh
The King Ohio entrusted this task u
!, M German jurist, Herr Msurer, who ?
cali pared a code ofcivil procedure, a c.
ned Of criminal procedure, and pc
an code. He was engaged very lao.oorlor
icsIs in the preparation Of a civil co
and when differences arose between
oh 7 and the government. He complain
nm. of i'll treatment and left the coun
This taking the fruits OF his laborS "
,s;Iv him, eince which time nothing
zone been done. 1t will have been 8
1sid. that
hon THE FRENCH CODE
anne has had a very important influence
oorts the development Of the law in NJ
time COMMITTEES, During the consulate
wear duty OF preparing a code OF the Ere
Law was assigned to commits