FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324  
325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   >>   >|  
g these States, which do have some form of "revised statutes" or complete code--and be it remembered that I am never here speaking of annual laws, for however bad their form and the form of their publication, they are usually, at least, _official_--it will be interesting, and, I think, throw further light on the subject, to cull some passages from the laws of States having such "authorized revisions," to show how far their real authority extends. The general statutes of 1897 of the State of Kentucky say on their title-page that they are an authorized compilation approved by the Supreme Court, but the form of approval of the Supreme Court of Kentucky runs as follows: "Although we consider this duty not lawfully imposed upon us," they say that, so far as they have observed, they "detect no errors in the compilation and it seems to have been properly done." Of how much value such approval would be in case there turned out to be a discrepancy between the compilation and the original statute, I leave to the lawyers to judge. The compiled laws of New Mexico of the same year, made by the solicitor-general, contain an amusing statement under his own signature, that he believes "a large part of the laws he there prints are either obsolete or have actually been repealed by certain later statutes," but he, as it were, shovels them in, in the hope that some of them may be good! The commissioners of the State of North Dakota go still farther. Their code of 1895 bears a statement that it is, by authority of law, "brought to date" by the commissioners, who go on to say that they have compared the codes of other States and have added and incorporated many other laws taken from such codes of other States, apparently because the commissioners thought them of value! One must really ask any first-year student of constitutional legislation what he thinks of that statement, not only of its constitutionality, but of its audacity. Finally, the State of South Dakota says, in its statutes of 1899, what I quoted at the beginning--that "all the laws contained in the book are to be considered as admissible in evidence," but not conclusive of their own authenticity or correct statement. We now come to the third, and, from the point of view of the believer in statutes, probably the worst class of all. That is to say, States which have no official or authorized compilation whatever and which rely entirely upon the enterprise of money-making publish
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324  
325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

statutes

 

States

 

compilation

 

statement

 
commissioners
 

authorized

 

Supreme

 

authority

 
general
 

approval


Kentucky
 
Dakota
 

official

 

apparently

 

shovels

 

incorporated

 

thought

 

brought

 

compared

 

farther


thinks
 

believer

 

authenticity

 

correct

 

enterprise

 

making

 
publish
 
conclusive
 

evidence

 
constitutionality

audacity

 

repealed

 
legislation
 

student

 

constitutional

 
Finally
 
considered
 

admissible

 

contained

 

beginning


quoted

 

approved

 

annual

 
speaking
 

remembered

 
lawfully
 

imposed

 

Although

 

subject

 
interesting