Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 03.pdf/72

 5i fore it set at work, and from then until now he has been the leading spirit in codifica tion, to whom has been conceded most of its merit, and upon whom has been charged all its blame. The great reform began timidly and proceeded slowly. It encoun tered the most determined and venomous hostility from the bar and the bench. Even Charles O'Connor, who was one of the sign ers of a memorial to the Legislature in 1847, praying them to instruct the commissioners "to provide for the abolition of the present forms of actions and pleadings in cases at common law for a uniform course of proceed ing in all cases, whether of legal or equitable cognizance, and for the abandonment of every form or proceeding not necessary to ascertain or preserve the rights of the par ties," was afterwards bitter in derision of and hostility to the code scheme of pleading. Some judges threw every obstacle in the way of enforcing the first code, the Code of Pro cedure in Civil Cases. The code however held its own, and made way; and the re formed practice is firmly fixed in the State and in many other States, and in England. Mr. Field's code of practice was subjected to revision and amendment for many years, un til it had overcome all opposition and criti cism, when a serious misfortune befell it. A commission was appointed to " revise and simplify the Statutes " of the States; and the first act of that commission was to revise and add to the code, enormously increasing its- bulk, changing its phraseology, and in many instances altering its provisions. Its clearness was obscured, its conciseness was rendered diffuse, its simplicity was made intricate, and its authority, well settled by thirty years of judicial construction, was de stroyed, and the task of reconstruction was again necessitated. The commissioners had the art and persistence to persuade the Leg islature to adopt this monstrous growth; and to-day the Code of Civil Procedure, in stead of one volume of moderate dimensions, forms, in the latest edition, with its deci sions, three volumes each as big as a family

Bible. If I were an opponent of general codification, I would point to this injudicious work as an example of the evils to which cod ification may subject a community through the carelessness or indifference of the Leg islature. Undoubtedly it has proved the most serious blow to the cause of general codification in the State of New York. In 1865 Mr. Field submitted three other codes to the Legislature, — the Penal Code (stating the substantive principles of criminal law), the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the Civil Code, or code of the general principles of the common and statutory law in civil cases. The Penal Code was adopted in 1882, and the Code of Criminal Procedure in 1 88 1; and both have given almost universal satisfaction, even to opponents of general codification. The Civil Code has not been adopted in New York, and after slumbering for ten years, for the last fifteen years has been the object of constant, violent, and bitter discussion, and of varying success and defeat. The measure has repeatedly passed one house or the other of the Legislature; twice it has passed both houses; once it has been vetoed by the Governor; once it was allowed to die a natural death; several times it has been de feated in one or the other house. During all these years it has been subjected to the most intense scrutiny and criticism of bench and bar, and has been repeatedly amended by Mr. Field, in deference to such suggestions; and although it was adopted in California in 1872, and has been successfully in practice there ever since, and has also been adopted in Dakota, yet the prophet is up to this time without honor in respect thereof in his own country. This result is entirely due to the apathy or hostility of the legal profession, two thirds of whom are probably opposed to it, and particularly to the well organized and able opposition of the Bar Association of the City of New York, a working majority of which have managed so far to dictate its policv, and defeat the mandate of the Consti tution of 1846. Probably a hundred lawyers