The leader., 1900-12-26
A NEW CODE.

Colonel Power, the accomplished
secretary of State, has given out to the
press the following paragraph:
The Annotated Code of 1892 will
have to be re annotated very soon II the
supreme court continues to construe
it and the legislature to amend it as In
recent years. There have been 50 sec
tons of the constitution and 3S4 sec
tions OF the code construed, and 221
sections of the code amended by the
legislature of 1894, 1896, 1897, 1893, 1900.
The next regular session of the legis-
lature will probably take up the mat
ter of new code"
1t does not follow, however, that the
next legislature should take up the
matter of new code. On the contra
ry, the history of codification in this
State would seem to indicate that
there is no necessity for so doing. The
first code of Mississippi made by legis-
lative authority was Poindexter's,
which was adopted in 1922. 1t remain
ed the code of the State until the pub
LEGATION of Howard & Hutchinson's
compilation, which was private en-
terprise, which received legislative
sanction, being merely republication
of the then existing statutes. In 1S4S
Hutchinson's code was published,
which was private affair and but
republication of existing statutes, as
was the preceding compilation above
mentioned. The code of 1857 was the
second code in the State made by leg
islative authority, and it remained in
force until the code of 1871 was adopt
ed The changes wrought by the war,
reconstruction and the adoption of a
new constitution caused the necessity
for new code and shortened the life
of the code of 1857. The code of 1871
was adopted by legislative authority,
but the necessity for it grew out of the
war, reconstruction and the adoption
of new constitution in 1869. The
code of 1880 was legislative produc-
ton. but the necessity for it was the
recognized deficiencies in the code of
1871, its carpetbag predecessor. The
defects of the code of 1871 we're not
more vigorously asserted by any one
than by Judge Campbell, one of the
commissioners who prepared that
code. He claimed, and justly claimed,
that the carpetbag legislature of 1871
dealt so unfairly with the commission
which had prepared the code as to do
them great injustice, and that the code
of 1871 was not worthy of the State,
because of the legislature tampering
with it after it came from the hands of
| the commission. This was unquestion-
ably true, and created the necessity
| for the code of 1880. The code of 1880
was adopted and remained in force I'M
til the code of 1892 became the law of
the State. The necessity for the code
of 1892 grew out of the change of the
constitution and the adoption of the
new one in 1890. While the legislature
has in a considerable number of in
stances amended the code of 1892, yet
in truth it has not amended it so as to
destroy its essential characteristics
and harmony. A large portion Of the
amendments have been really inmate
rial, and number of the amendments
themselves have been repealed since
their adoption.
If new code were now adopted, the
process of amendment would go on,
and go on just as largely as they have
progressed since 1892 A new edition
of the code of 1892 might be published
with advantage by some enterprisiDg,
competent person, Incorporating into
it the amendments which have been
made and bringing the annotations of
references to supreme court decisions
down to date, or volume by way of
supplement to the code might be got
ten out, but there is really no neces-
sity for new code being adopted. -
Picoyune's Mississippi Bureau