El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1913-12-08
10000 Laws, Every Year
Yale Professor Declares Our Laws
Most IntOlerable in World, Be
cause of Lack of Uniformity.
by Frederic J. Haskin
TTASHINGTON, D. G,

IWTAsHINGTON, D. C, Dec.
! w S.-The United States out
put of new laws is now
about 10000 year To these
must be added the thousands of I'M
reported decisions wnIcn modify or
! change former constructions of as
many existing statutes. Prof Charles
! p. Sherman, of Yale university. in
pointing out the foregoing, declares
| that the laws of the United states are
| now the most intOlerable in the world,
! if not in all human history. And all
/ because Of the lack of uniformity.
( In showing how serious all this is,
/ professor Sherman pictures the plight
of a German. or any other European
! jurist, who might come to prosecute
J legal research in American law. He
( declares that the savant would find
/ himself hOpelessly lost in a maze of
/ hundreds of thousands of conflicting
statutes and enactmentS, clarified only
by spasmodic Qualifications as widely
apart as are the states themselves. The
multiplicity Of American laws. the con-
tradictiOns that result from the enact
ment of one law for one state and
another law for another state, and
third law for the United States as a
whole, clogs all our courts to such an
extent that oftentimes justice itself is
perverted because long delayed deci-
siOns come too late TO relieve the Htl-
giants.
The laws of the federal government
recently were cOdified. For years on
end congress. had been grinding out
new legislation and the courts had
been evolving new decisions until the
federal law itself was maze of con-
! tradicUOnS- Congress finally decided
that the time had come to assemble
all the various enactmentS into one
comprehensive system Of law. A COM
mittee on the revision and codificatiOn
of the federal laws was appointed, and
after years Of labor and research it
placed before congress a complete re-
vision and codification, in which
laws which had been interpreted con-
trary to the intent of those who had
enacted them were Strengthened out
to remedy the neutrality-suspicious.. and
in which the inharmOnies and incon-
gruities of the federal law were irOned
out and smOothed down 1t was a
monumental task to thus draw up
code which would stand as a symmetTi-
cal unit rather than conglOmeratiOn
of conflicting laws. Congress freely
admitted that good piece of work
had been done, and attested its APP
proval by enacting the new code as a
whole.
COdifying state Statutes.
If the cOdification of the federal law
was In itself task of years. it can
easily be imagined that it would be a
tremendous undertaking to codify the
hundreds of thousands of statutes that
the As states have enacted and are
attempting to enforce, and al the same
time to cite the cases in which the
these laws have been interpreted.
There are As legislatures in the country
and II would be difficult to find any
two of the same mind on any given
subject. The viewpoints of these
bodies differ, the needs of the people
vary, and the situations to be met are
seldom the same. What Wisconsin
supports would not fit New York. and
what Kansas believes in would be a
misfit in South Carolina So it happens
mat there VIII ever be a claShlng OF
state laws that even the best efforts
Of those who are working for uni-
formlty can never overcome
But there are some laws Of state
enactment which have peculiar bear
ing on interstate affairs. For instance,
the marriage and divorce laws of the
various states have made it possible
for citizens to violate the laws of their
own state and still 20 unScathed. I
Uniform railroad laws and uniform
bills of lading are desirable. as are
many other laws of interstate interest,
but which are without the province Of
federal jurisdiction.
advocates One Law For All.
Professor sherman objects to the
way in which the states plunge ahead |
and enact laws. each state looking
solely to itself and without due regard
to the rights Of the people of other {
states. He says that all this4is but the =.
assertion of the doctrine of states
rights in another form. He would I
have one law for the whole United !
States, and declares that the enactment
of diverse state laws is beneficial to
only one class Of citizens. e.. the /
petufogging lawyers to whom a con- /
1llct OF laws means augmented ntiga-
ton. He contends that there is no /
good reason why all laws. state and |
national, should not be uniform, even [
though the United States is a country (
as large as all Europe and with inter \
ests fully as diverse. In proof of this 1
assertion. he points to our uniform 4
naturalization and admiralty laws, and :
insists that uniformity of law through !
congressional enactment no matter (
what its nature, has never worked i'll I
TO the people.
The progress Of the movement to- /
ward uniform laws in the United /
states has been rapid in so far as it 1
covers matters Of vital import to all /
the people Forty OF the states have
already passed the uniform negotiable ,
instrument law, which was first pub
1lshed in 1896, and half Of them now
nave the uniform warehouse receipts
law. Ten states have adopted the
uniform sales law, while eight have
taken up and passed the uniform bills
of ladlng law. Six states have enacted |
the uniform law Of foreign wills, five
the uniform stock transfer act four !
three the uniform divorce law.
There are other model laws that have
been drafted or are under consideration |
by the conference Of commissioners on
uniform state laws, organized under !
the auspices Of the american Bar Asso- I
citation. One of these is a uniform /
law on child labor, intending to
the working conditions Of
children in all the states uniform
marriage and marriage license act
has proved to be one Of the most
desirable pieces of legislation that
could be enacted The thousands Of
of runaway couples every
week in the year, in which couples
who could not legally marry at home
run away to another state and are
married there. defyinS the law of
their own state in so doing, attest to
the necessity of a uniform marriage
license law Indeed the practice is 50
common that few citizens realize the
gravity Of the situation. state may
enact and attempt to enforce law
eXacting high matrimonial standards
only to have it daily set aside by the
simple eXpedient of slipping across
the border. Here is not only a wilfull
with the sacred institution
of marriage, but the deliberate de-
fiance by citizens of the laws of the
commonwealth whose citizens they are. !
uniform WOrkingmens' cOmpensa-
ton law has also been recommended. !
The need of uniformity is apparent in
the case of mechanics liens, which are
so diverse that they are almost at
cross purposes in many common
Wealths