New-York tribune., 1900-01-14
REVISION OF STATE LAWS.
CHANGES PROPOSED BY COMMISSION
TO BE SENT TO LEGISLATURES.

TO RE SEMI
Atbanv Ian. 13-The Statutory Revision Com
mission has completed its codfcation and re-
vision Of the laws and the result of Its work
win be presented at this session Of the Legis-
iat,re in the form of eleven different bills COW
ering all practice and judgment proceedings.
The plan Of the Commissioners Involves a sepa-
ration of the code into different statutes, leav-
Ing Code of Civil Procedure embracing prac-
tice applicable to the Court of Appeals the Su-
preme Court and the County Court. The new
code win contain sixty articles and about two
thousand sections.
THE Commissioners assert that they have not
written a new code, but that the present prac-
t;ce is continued with only slight notifications,
made necessary in consequence of rearrange-
rnent The eleven bills to be presented are; the
Naturalization law. the Drainage law, the IN
solvent Debtors law the Condemnation law.
the Jury law. the Evidence law, the Statute OF
Limitations the judiciary law, the surrogates
Code the justices Code and the Code of civil
Procedure. Nose of these bills relate only to
single subject or a closely related group OF sub
sects. They include not only matters relating
TO procedure now in the code. but other mat
ters now contained in about one hundred inde-
pendent statutes.
The Commission says:
A proposed judiciary law was presented by
the Commissioners in 1898. and again in 1888
and the Justices Code was presented in 1873
THE Iegislature deferred action on these codes
until the whole scheme could be presented. IN
accordance with that suggestion these ana oIher
bills included in the plan VIII De presehteu at
this session.
MANY SECTIONS IN NEW CODE.
The new code will contain about two thousand
sections but in consequence of leaving pianks
between articles the apparent NUMBER VIII De
somewhat larger. The Commissioners nave hUI
written a new code. The code as presented VIII
continue the present practice with ohly slsns s
notifications made necessary in consequence Vi
The nTeponderance of opirfon among judges
and LAWYERS as expressed to the Commissioners
IS in favor of keeping the practice substantial!
IS II is This view is based on the 1acl theI
the more important parts of the present cpot ttt
have been in force about twenty seI yea E anu eiiIe'
comparatively few amendments nave peeh tIi il..ue
The practice has become substantially setueu
by a long course of judicial decisions ana on
lection is made to change merely TOT 'he Sane
The Commissioners have made an examina-
tion of the code with view VI as0ei 'ss ~
extent of amendments
This examination shows that in the early
part of the code, relating to general II
in actions there are S43 sections, OF Whlch 1dp
have been amended since 1879, leaving I53
which have not been amended in twenty years.
The significance OF L9eSe rners speciaIi5
ernnbasiZed bv specific subjects, such as plead
ings. with 65 sections, and only two amenoe9'
arrests II sections, and four amended; attach-
noents 73 sections. and seven amended; 5udg-
rnenfs in actions 50 sections and four amended;
executions against real property, 5I sections
and three amended; parties, 40 sections and hVe
An examination of other parts of the code in
Guiding ejectment partition, dover, foreclosure
waste replevin, miscellaneous actions, Surro-
gates courts and Justices courts, shows S9o
sections, of which 155 have been amended, Ihe
large number of these amendments relate to
practice in Surrogates' and Justlces courts.
These subjects, as already noted, will be IN
separate codes. OF the other sections IN thls
mart Of the code only II per cent have been
amended.
OBJECTIONS TO ENGLISH SYSTEM.
The suggestion has been made by eminent
lawyers that the English system of procedure
be adopted in this State. That system involves
rules made by the judges, and which be
changed only by the approval Of Parliament
The English system also includes many subjects
Of practice not included in the court rules The
Commissioners have examined the English prac-
tice to some extent for the purpose Of comparing
the whole body Of English practice with the
American This examination shows approx
irnately that under the English system of pro-
cedure there are in the aggregate over $500
sections relating to procedure, counting each
rule section, and some subjects embrace
a larger body of law than the same subjects in
the American code. The Commissioners think
that it may be at least doubtful whether the
aggregate body of the practice here would be
materially reduced if the Judges were charged
with the duty of making rules for procedure,
now included in the code. The small percentage
of amendments to the present code shows
servative treatment Of the subject Of procedure
by the Legislature.
prepared by the Commissioners will show these
facts more in detail. and will present to the
profession and the Legislature general view
Of American procedure, as compared with sim
liar subjects under the English system This,
il is thought, will aid the lawyers Of the State
as well as members of the Legislature in deter
mining whether the present system should be
continued, whether it would be desirable to
reconstruct the procedure on the English model