Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-10-14

committees to employ two persons to revise
the code Of 1855. to print the same and to re-
port 1t at the following session. When the
next session convened the commission was
not ready to report and Senator Morrill,
offered a resolution extending the time until
the Thirty-ninth Congress. The matter
dragged along and nothing was heard from
the commission.
In the Forty-second Congress Gov. Cooke
OF the District of Columbia sent to Congress
code which had been prepared under act
OF the local legislative assembly by George
p. Fisher. Hugh Caperton, Samuel Phillips,
e. G. Ingersoll and r. D. Mussey. No ac-
ton was taken by Congress further than to
receive the code and place 1t on file. In the
Forty-fourth Congress, at the first session,
q bill was reported from the Senate COM
mittee on revision Of the laws providing for
the compilation OF the United States stat
utes relating to the District of Columbia.
The bill was recommitted to the committee
and that was the last heard of it.
The act Of June II. 1878. to provide per-
manent form OF government for the Dis
trict OF Columbia carried q provision d.
recting the Commissioners to report to
Congress a draft of auch additional laws
or amendments to existing laws as in their
opinion ARE necessary for the harmonious
working OF the system hereby adopted"
The sundrv civil appropriation bill Of the
previous session had provided for the prepa-
ration Of a code and 900 appropriated for
legislation Commissioner Dent sent to Con-
sress at the beginning Of the second session
OF the Forty,sixth Congress civil code
ton Of the district attorney, Mr.. A. G.
Riddle. Commissioner Dent said: This code,
together with the code Of municipal law
submitted submitted t. the House January :, ls1s.
plated by the act of June II, 1879. and act of
March 8. 1872 The early enactment Of this
code with such amendments or modif1ca-
ter Of 30 much Importance to the best in
terests Of the District and to an efficient
and vigorous administration Of its affairs
that the Commissioners venture to express
the hope that 1t will receive the prompt
and favorable consideration of Congress"
But 1t did not. The code was placed on
file and that was the end Of 1t.
AT the second session Of the Forty-sixth
Congress the House District committee re-
ported bill to revise the acts Of Con-
sress relating to the District and the acts
OF the corporation. the levy court and the
regulations Of the Commissioners 1t was
passed by the House. reported and consid-
cred in the Senate. but did not pass
In the Forty-seventh Congress Mr. Con-
verse introduced a bill in the House to es-
tablish municipal code 1t was consid-
cred. night sessions being held for that
purpose. hut did not pass. similar bill
was introduced in the Senate by Mr.. Har-
ris, but no action was taken. Senator Cam
eron OF Wisconsin introduced q bill to COM
pile and revise the statute laws-no action.
.,5.,i. Mr.. McComas' Report.
In the Forty-eighth Congress, first ses-
sion, Mr.. McComas introduced a bill to
provide criminal code for the District, by
authorizing the judges Of the Supreme Court
Of the District to appoint one person learn
ed In the law to prepare the code and ap-
propriating $500 for the purpose. The bill
was acted upon by the District committee
and Mr.. McComas reported 1t to the House.
accompanied by the following report:
The condition Of the statute law of the
District Of Columbia is deplorable Con-
gress has never found time to give to the
subject the attention absolutely necessary.
Repeated attempts to provide a code have
OF success grows less as the volume of con-
gressipnal legislation increases. To attempt
at this time to pass code would surely
faii. But something may yet be done which
Will meet present needs and serve as q
basis for q code in the future. The condi-
ton OF the criminal laws In force here Is a
public scandal The laws of England prior
TO July 4. 1776, and the laws of Maryland as
they existed February "a, 1901, constitute
the body of the laws for the punishment of
crime In this District Congress at times
has spasmodically patched the system. Sub
stanttauy there has been no development
or improvement upon the laws Of Maryland
In force in 1901. During eighty three years
some penalties and even crimes have be-
come obsolete. New crimes have been fire.
Quent that are difficult to punish under
existing statutes. Confusion and delay re-
suit which an able and upright bench can
not prevent.
arise Ia classifying offenses as misdemean-
ors or felonies uncertainties as to the re-
suits Of conviction respecting disabilities
and forfeitures. the right Of defendants and
the government to challenge the qualifica-
ton Of Jurors. the selection Of talesmen.
the process for witnesses beyond the turis-
diction and their compensation. The laws
respecting lotteries and gambling are very
loose. There are no degrees in murder. A
Jury Is compelled to find murder or man.
slaughter. and criminal thus escapes with
inadequate punishment. There is no PEN
atty for incest. Adultery escapes with the
while for blasphemy the law prescribes bor-
ing Through the tongue with a red-hot iron.
f~ Arson In the daytime and arson at night
are not differently punished: 1t was long
doubted whether the appalling crime Of
Guiteau could be tried and punished in this
District. Enough instances have been cited
is one step in the right direction. Others
will follow. This reform should not be de-
layed."
Mr. McComas' bill passed the House at
Senate committee on District Of Columbia
without amendment, placed upon the calen-
dar and there 1t languished and died.
In the Forty-ninth Congress at the be-
ginning OF the first session Mr.. Ingalls, in
Produced in the Senate bill to establish a
municipal code. 1t was bill Of 32l pages
and provided a complete municipal code.
No action was taken upon 1t. In the same
which had failed at the previous session,
but 1t was not even reported.
- - Mr.. Hemphill's Report.
At the second session of the Forty-ninth
Mr.. Hemphiil. chairman Of the House Dis
trict committee took the matter up. He i'm
troduced bill providing for the compilation
of the District laws by the appointment of
three commissioners. The bill passed the
House in the middle of February, was re-
ported to the Senate but Congress adjourn
ed before final action could be taken. Mr..
Hemphill's report upon this bin was as fol-
lows:
ut is beyond contention that the laws of
the District are in such conflict and confu-
sion that hardly any two persons can agree
as to what is the law. Sections 81 and 80 Of
the Revised Statutes declare that all ordi-
nances of the cities of Washington and
Georgetown, respectively, and the levy
court of the District, except as modified by
Congress or the legislative assembly of the
District since June l, 1871. unless modified
or repealed and the laws of Maryland In
force February a. 1901, except such as have
been modified or repealed by Congress- &c,
shall continue in force in the District.
This sufficiently shows the chaotic con-
dition of the law end the necessity OF
compilation. And so. also. as the laws are
construed from time to time by the Supreme
Court of the District. there ought to be