Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1901-11-09

s. A comparison of the two sections will
clearly show the remarkable omission from
the code of the tenure saving clause in sec
ton 55a7.
1.-The repeal of the several acts embraced in
the said revision shall not affect any act
done, or any right accruing or accrued, or
any suit or proceeding had or commenced
in any civil cause before the said repeal,
but all rights and liabilities under said acts
shall continue, and may be enforced in the
same manner as If said repeal had not
been made; nor shall said repeal, in any
manner, affect the right to any office, or
change the term tenure thereof"
Section 1898 of the code reads as follows:
1.-THE repeal by the preceding section of
any statute, in whole or in part, shall not
affect any act done or any right accruing
or accrued, or any suit or proceeding had
OF commenced in any civil cause before
such repeal, but all rights and liabilities I'M
der the statutes or parts thereof so re-
pealed shall continue and may be enforced
In the same manner as If such repeal had
not been made; Provided, that the pro-
visions of this code relating to procedure
or practice and not affecting the substan-
tial rights Of parties shall apply to pending
suits or proceedings civil or criminal"
Tenure Saving Clause Omitted.
Why the tenure saving clause was omit
ted from the code, in view of the fact that
section 1898 was drawn in part literally
parent and the more carefully the two sec
tons are compared the more remarkable
appears the omission Of the tenure saving
clause from the code. If such clause was
necessary in the opinion of Congress IN sec
ton 5J97 R. s. U. S., 1t would seem TO be
equally necessary in the code; nor would 1t
appear that the language preceding the
tenure saving clause was Intended to or did
include tenures or rights to public Offices
The omission of a tenure saving clause
fr0y he nn6a Ctp ri co n
nature too serious to be dismissed with an
impatient gesture, and a general statement
that the code does not affect the present
incumbents. So far no specific sseasons
have been given to show that the code has
not the effect of legislating the present in
cumbents mentioned out of their offices.
Such reasons have been carefully looked
for, with the result that the following three
may possibly be worthy of consideration:
1t is general rule of law that when an
act creating certain rights, not in the ma
ture of contract, is repealed, and the later
act re-enacts the provisions of the former,
the later act in it's practical operation and
effect will be considered as continuing
rather than repeating The provisions of the
former act. The objection, however, to the
application of this rule to the code seems
to be that the rule only applies to property
rights. and not to rights to public offices.
A public Office Is a public trust, and not
property, nor has 1t any such element Of
contract in it as will give It the protection
VI Tie lcucTdl SoHStltuliOH "A Stdtc court
once held this rule to be applicable to the
tenure of a public office. Against this,
however, are numerous cases establishing
the general rule that public office is va
Gated by the repeal of the law or ordi-
nance by which it was created.
Section 1888 of the Code.
The saving by section 1888 Of the code of
ANY act done or any right . accrued
would prevent the present incumbents from
being affected by the repeating provisions
of the CODE provided that this language
may be construed to cover as an "act
DONE the appointment to the particular Of
fee, and as right accrued the right to
the particular Office. The objection to this
construction, as above pointed out, is that
the language Of the code appears to pro-
tect only property rights, and not tenureS
or rights to public offices, and this objec-
ton is strengthened by the fact that sec
ton 1897, Revised Statutes, United States,
from which section 1893 was literally drawn
in part, contains the specific tenure saving
clause above mentioned. 1t Is fair to pre-
sumo that IL the language Of the code, and
the same language Of the section from
or tenure to a public Office the express
tenure saving clause would not have been
added to section 5597, Revised Statutes,
United States.
Section 1910 Of the code provides that
nothing in the repeating clause Contained
shall be held to affect the operation OF en-
forcement in the District -of Columbia.
among other things, of any general statute
Of the United States not locally inappIi-
cable In the District OF Columbia, except In
% far as the same may be inconsistent