was kind enough to adopt, requesting the
Committee on the Legislative Department to
inquire into the expediency of such a pro-
vision. We have adopted the principle of
codifying the laws of the State, It is obvious
that if we are to have every year or two a
supplement to this Code, in the course of
ten or twelve years the condition of the leg-
islation of the State will be in a worse state
of confusion than that in which it stood when
the codification commenced. We have already
one or two supplements to the Code. The pro-
position is, that instead of publishing a volume
at the end of every session of the Legis-
lature, a volume embracing additions and
alterations only, the Legislature should pro-
vide by law for re-publication of the Code,
so that the last edition of the Code shall al-
ways represent the statute law as it exists.
Mr. MILLER. I hops the amendment will
prevail The object of it has been stated by
my friend from Prince George's (Mr. Belt)
very clearly. The great difficulty under our
old system was that the laws were scattered
through many volumes, and it was almost
impossible for any man who was not a lawyer
to ascertain whether the statute found in any
particular book was the existing law or not.
He had to look through half a dozen indexes
to find whether the law was repealed or not.
That necessity brought about the adoption,
by the Convention of 1850, of the system of
codification. The Code was then, of course,
only the codification of the laws which ex-
isted at the time it was prepared and adopted
by the Legislature. From year to year,
however, amendments are made in that Code;
sections are repealed or modified and new
sections are added. If we go on in this way,
publishing annual supplements to the Code,
without any new codification atall, we shall
in a few years find ourselves in the same pre-
dicament we were in before any codification
was adopted.
The expense to the State will not be very
great, because it can be easily enough pro-
vided that the Code shall be stereotyped, and
the modifications year by year can be made
in the stereotype plates. The cost would be
trifling, and the new volumes could be pub-
lished as early as the volume of laws em-
bracing public and local laws both, giving
to every man the law just as it stands. I
should not like to subject the Legislature to
any great expense on that account; but I
think the additional expense would not be
great.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. Can any gentleman in-
form me what is the expense of publishing
the volume of laws at the end of the session
of the General Assembly ?
Mr. SCHLEY. How large an edition ?
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. Of course the edition
would be nothing like so large as the annual
edition of the laws, because it is simply for
one year's consumption. Enough would be |
printed merely to meet the demands of the
year: for when the Legislature meet again
we should have another edition.
Mr BELT. It would be scarcely any ex-
pense at all. It would only be necessary to
change the laws which were altered.
Mr. STIRLING. This is a very important
matter. I do not like to vote against any-
thing so useful in its intention as this propo-
sition; but unless I can have more light on
the subject I must vote against it. If it is
only practicable it seems to me that it will
be very desirable to have the statutes of the
State something like akaleidoscope, so that
the moment yon push one out you have
another one in. But I doubt whether it is
practicable always to represent the existing
state of the legislation of the State. The
Legislature sometimes will pass not more
than five or six acts amending the Code. Is
the whole Code, a book of eight hundred
pages, to be printed over again for the purpose
of including five or six changes? I do not
think the last Legislature made any material
alteration in the Code, except in the addition
of new sections. All that is necessary is to
look at the Code and two or three volumes of
laws for the new matter ?
Mr. MILLER. There may be some years
when slight alterations will be made. Per-
haps it will be better if my friend from Prince
George's would modify his amendment so
that the code should be reprinted every five
or six years.
Mr. STIRLING. I have no objection to it,
if a sufficient time elapses. But it seems to
me it would be better to leave the matter in
the hands of the Legislature itself. Public
convenience will require a republication of
the code, and I think it would be done as
often as every ten years at least.
The PRESIDENT. The cost of printing the
volume of the laws at the last session was
about $1,700.
Mr. MILLER. The publication of the code
would cost scarcely anything more than the
paper and binding.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. Of course whatever it
would cost to print the entire volume of the
code would be so much additional to printing
the laws. The laws must be printed; other-
wise the private laws would never find their
way into print at all.
Mr. SCHLEY. It has been suggested that
this is an important matter. Nobody here
seems to be informed what will be the cost of
republishing the code every few years. I feel
certain that it will involve a serious expense
and is unnecessary. If it be necessary, the
General Assembly has the power to republish
the code whenever in their judgment they
deem it expedient. I should therefore defer
to its judgment of the expediency and of the
expense.
The PRESIDENT. I should not suppose the
stereotype plates could be readily changed. |
