Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-08-25
LAW COD|F|CAT|ON
WORK IS DEFENDED
District Bar Head Answers
Barger Criticism to House
Chairman.

The codification of the District laws,
criticized in a letter from Harry >.
Barger to Chairman Fitzgerald OF the
House Committee in charge of this
work, was upheld today by Col. j.
Miller Kenyon, president OF the Distrlct
Bar Association. "Of course individuals
will have their own notions, SAID Col.
Kenyon, "but anything that places tne
law. as il is, at our elbow, is helpIul.
THAT is what the compilation now under
attack has done. 1t has made the law
accessible to every one, laymen as well
as lawyers"
eff we have the maxim, Ignorance OF
the law is no excuse we should place
knowledge of the law within the reacn
of every one Any compilation Wnlch
gives the lawyer, right at his desk, Ine
| law as 1t now stands. so that ne can
find it in one volume without having
to search through many Volumes anu a,,,
still be In doubt Is not only extremely
valuable but is great public benefac-
ton"
He pointed out that the compilation
was done by we'll known washington
LAWYERS. teachers In Washington law
schools. who were selected by the House
Committee with the approval and In
dorsement of the District Bar Asso-
! citation.
Declares Lawyers Approve.
w, w. Millen, for many years treas
urer of the bar association and who on
two recent occasions was unanimously
indorsed by that association for APP
pointment as a justice on the District
Supreme Court bench, said he had
| heard nothing but heartiest approval
| by many leading Washington attorneys,
Millen was appointed chairman OF
special committee OF the bar assocla-
ton to cooperate with the compners.
| He sat with the committee during the
preparation of the code and observed
the manner in which the compilers
were doing their work, (which was very
satisfactory" he said.
Barger Charges Revision"
Barger's letter to Chairman Fitz-
gerald charges that the committee has
| attempted to revise the code OF the
] District. instead OF working toward
| consolidation and codification of the
| laws as provided in the act OF Con-
gress which authorized the work. He
says that he is supported in this con-
| tention by other Washington lawyers.
| He accuses the conpilers OF having
| eliminated some laws which they took
| for granted as repealed, including some
| that he says they had no business to
omit" The net result, mas Deen barger
argues, "that the codification does not
correctly state the law as Is and Is
| therefore worthless"
In concluding his letter to Chair
man Fitzgerald, Barger says:
Revision Not Authorised"
Inquiry made of one Of the mem
bers of the bar who assisted your
committee in the preparation OF the
new code elected the information
that acts regarded as having been re-
pealed or superseded have been omit
| tod, as well as acts regarded as obso-
lete and inconsistent, and that where
| there was doubt whether given act
| had been repealed or was obsolete or
| inconsistent, it was included.
Certainly an attempt has been made
at a revision rather than a 'consolida-
| ton and codificatioll' of the laws re-
| lating to or in force in the District OF
! Columbia and it is respectfully sug-
| geSted that, since the authority con-
| ferred by Congress has been so far ex-
ceeded, the new code can not be re-
| garded and accepted as official or as a
| correct statement of the law relating 10
| or in force in the District OF Columbia.
| Congress aSsuredly did not authorize
| a revision; and 1t Is certain that Con-
gress could not have authorized your
! committe or any person or persons
working under its direction to make
/ revision, even II it mad SO desired. he
| vision must be the act of Congress, the
same as anV other enactment"