Page:The American Cyclopædia (1879) Volume V.djvu/13

which received the inappropriate designation of codes; as the Code Henri, made by Brisson in the reign of Henry III.; the Code Murmllac or Nichau, under Louis XIII. (1629), relating to judicial procedure; and the Code Louis XV., by Ohaussepierre, containing the ordonnances from 1722 to 1740. Several comprehensive ordonnances, which were in fact codes of laws relating to particular subjects, were enacted in the reign of Louis XVI. But the necessity of a general compilation, and the- assimilation of all the different systems into a homogeneous jurisprudence for the use of the whole nation, became more and more pressing, till the revolution paved the way for its accomplishment. It was early the subject of discussion, and projects were reported by Cambaceres in 1793 and 1795, which, though incomplete in details, and on the whole unsatisfactory, yet furtiished a perspicuous and well arranged outline. By a consular decree, Aug. 12, 1800, a commission was constituted " to compare the order which had been followed in the preparation of the projects for a civil code hitherto published, to determine the plan which the commissioners should think best to adopt, and to discuss the chief principles of civil legislation." Portalis, Tronchet, Bigot de Preameneu, Maleville, and the minister of justice were the commissioners. In 1801 they reported a draft of a civil code, which was submitted to the court of cassation and other courts of appeal, and with the reports of the judges was finally brought before the council of state, in which Napoleon (then first consul) presided in person. The discussion, which was consecutive and thorough, may be found in a work entitled Conference du code civil, avec la discussion particuli&re du conseil d'etat, &c. (Paris, 1805). In the discussion and adjustment of the code, Tronchet, Eoederer, Portalis, Thibaudeau, Cambaceres, and Le Brun were the most conspicuous. Of these, Tronchet was the most regarded by the first consul for profound and enlightened views; Le Brun was the best qualified as a redacteur. In the same manner the other codes were reported, discussed, and amended. The whole revision was finally adopted under the title of Lea cinque codes, consisting of the civil code (which, as the first in order, and most important, was distinguished by the appellation of the Code Napoleon), the code of criminal procedure, penal code, code of civil procedure, and code of commerce. Another was added by Charles X. (1827), entitled the Code forestier, which is a collection of laws relating to the administration of the wood lands belonging to the king, of to cities, villages, &c.; and the whole is now published under the title of Les six codes. Of the merits of this great work we have sufficient evidence from the fact that it still continues, with but little change, to be the law of France, notwithstanding the subversion of the government by which it was established. The extent of its influence upon the laws of other countries has been very great. Civil codes modelled after the Code Napoleon were promulgated in the Two Sicilies in 1819, the Netherlands in 1822 and 1837, Hayti in 1826, Sardinia in 1837, the Swiss cantons from 1819 to 1855, and Bolivia in 1843; and everywhere the Latin races appear to be following these examples. In Germany, until a recent period, the laws, both civil and criminal, have been in a state of great confusion. In 1532 the statutes commonly known as the Carolina Criminalis were enacted by the emperor Charles V. for the regulation of criminal proceedings. Prior to that time the law of the empire relating to crimes was threefold: 1, the Germanic, contained in the ancient barbaric codes and subsequent local usages; 2, the provisions of the Roman law in the compilations of Justinian, particularly the Libri Terribiles of the Digest, and the 18th title of the Institutes; 3, the various penal provisions of the canon law (Corpus Juris Canonici). The Carolina Criminalis purported to be " a simple instruction for unlearned judges, to teach them how to proceed in criminal cases." It did not supersede the previously existing laws, but referred to them, sometimes defining what was obscure, and fixed punishments with more exactness, but more particularly regulated the form of criminal proceedings. Being in form didactic rather than statutory, a large license was taken by judges in administering the law as thus prescribed, and uncertainty still prevailed. The revision of the Prussian laws known as the Code Frederic, published 1749-'57, revised after 1780, but not put in force till 1794, was intended to obviate, according to its preface, 1, the difficulties of the Roman codes; 2, the disputes of the commentators; 3, the contradictions of Roman and German law. Like the Institutes, it divides the subject into the law of persons, of things, and of obligations. The penal laws have since been repeatedly revised. In 1826 a commission was appointed to prepare a new penal code, in pursuance of which six different projects were presented and discussed at various times, during a period of 25 years; and the code which is now in force was finally adopted in 1851, and has been highly praised. Other German states made efforts toward codification in the last century. A criminal code for Bavaria was promulgated in 1751, and for Austria in 1768, and again in 1786. In the latter country a civil code was produced in 1811, founded in great measure on the Prussian code; and a code of criminal procedure was published in 1852, which adopts the classification of offences contained in the French penal code. In Bavaria a penal code prepared by Feuerbach was adopted in 1813, which was received with such favor as to be accepted by several other states. In Russia a commission, which originated with Peter the Great, reported in 1832 the Svod zaTconov, which became the exclusive source of law in 1835. This comprises eight codes, devoted respectively to 1, the state and imperial family; 2,