PROCEEDINGS.

found me in South Carolina. I was speedily dubbed in South Carolina as a carpet-bagger although I was really a haversacker, going there with a musket and a haversack. Misfortune, or some kind of fortune, induced me to accept the position of candidate for the legislature and I was elected member of the Senate from the city of Charleston.

One of the provisions of the Constitution of South Carolina which had been adopted was that the first legislature should appoint a Commission to adopt a code practice. I was then a member of the Senate and Chairman of the

Judiciary Committee of the Senate. The matter was presented to me by many members of the House and Senate, and I was asked for my opinion upon it. I said, of all things in the world, let the old practice of South Carolina alone, let the common law practice, which has existed from time out of mind in South Carolina stay, let us not disturb that. But the members of the legislature were not inclined to do that because they had taken an oath to support the Constitution, and the Constitution required a code. Before the sessions were out they devised a law providing for the appointment of a Commission to draft a code, and without any desire, and without any knowledge on my part and against my wishes, I was elected a member of that Code Commission. I was indebted for it, of course, to the official position which I occupied in the legislature. I went to that Code Commission very much as a man would go to the gallows who was not in favor of being hung, and took up the work.

My whole education and practice previous to the war had been the common law practice, but I was obliged then to sit down with a Commission of three and study the code. After studying it some considerable time and getting at the kernel of it, I made up my mind that it was not really so bad a thing as I had supposed it was. I devoted myself patiently, laboriously, to adapting a code practice to the Constitution and laws of South Carolina.

While doing so

PROCEEDINGS.

I met often many leading members of the bar who inquired what was going to be done, and if I was really going to impose that awful code practice upon South Carolina. Many of the judges protested with me against it. We had the finest practice that was ever invented or devised by the wit of man, namely, the old common law practice. Well, I would say to them if you study it as hard as I have studied it I think you will change your mind. I have changed mine; mine was in the same condition as yours, but I am now

satisfied that if you will adopt this code practice and put it in force you will like it better than you did the old common law practice.

Finally, at the end of a year the code was prepared and I reported it to the legislature. After a good deal of hesitation and jangling among the lawyers in opposition, and the lawyers of the State, the code was adopted. I remember well what one of the Judges said to me when the legislature adjourned. He said, "Corbin, you have compelled every one of us old lawyers from beginning to end to begin anew and study law." "Well," I said, "Judge, it will do you good, I think it will." He said, "We have got to do it or else quit practice." And his estimation of the code was just about the estimation of a majority of all the lawyers of that State; they did not like the code, did not like the men that imposed the code upon them. They did not like anything about it, did not like the name of it, did not like the legislature. But they did all go to work studiously and in a very short time the lawyers of that State were pretty good code lawyers. And I wish to say to you now that after three years' practice under the code I do not think there was a lawyer in that State that did not thank us for imposing a code upon that state which brushed away all the cobwebs of the old common law. These are very useful in their way, and originated, it is true, away back in medieval times when people did not know very much about

PROCEEDINGS.

it, but thought they would be good form, and they gradually grew into the practice.

The code gave them something to think about and reduced the issues and practice of the law down to simplicity, and everybody was in favor of it just as soon as they came to understand it. I believe that will be so in this State. I have no idea in the world but what, if you were compelled to study it and learn it and apply it you would all be in favor of it and nobody in this world could get you to go back to the common law practice. I have come to this State, been practicing law here for fifteen years. I have come back to the common law practice as nearly as you have it here, which is very similar to the practice in Vermont which I learned in my boyhood-I come to it easily enough, it came back to me like my A, B, C's which I learned when I was young and I do not find any difficulty with it. But at the same time if I had time I could explain to you why you would be benefited and pleased with the code prac'tice. I know it will give you trouble, give you labor. It would compel you to examine anew a great many questions which you think you now understand and which you are satisfied with because you have no fault to find with them. I do recommend to you sincerely, the code practice from my own experience and from my own practice-and I practiced in South Carolina for twenty years after the code was adopted, and I know now that the most conservative people in the world were the lawyers of South Carolina, and they are all to a man today in favor of the code. They have had a chance to repeal it fifty times since we induced them to adopt it, but not a single effort has been made. Hardly a change has been made in the code practice since it was introduced in that State, and I know that it is there to stay; and it would be here to stay if you once adopted it and devoted yourselves to learning what it means, and its practical application. (Applause.)

PROCEEDINGS.

PRESIDENT HOLDOM: Mr. Page's resolution is in order now; let the Secretary read it.

MR. GRESHAM: I offer again the resolution which I presented awhile ago: Resolved, that the President of this Association appoint a committee of nine to report to this Association at its next annual meeting, as to whether or not it would be advisable to recommend to the legislature the adoption of a code by the State of Illinois.

MR. CHASE: I second the motion.

MR. CHAPMAN: I move that the resolution which has just been offered be laid upon the table.

The motion was seconded.

MR. HIRSCHL: I suppose that last motion is not debatable.

PRESIDENT HOLDOM: No, sir.

MR. HIRSCHL: But I think fairness would compel its withdrawal. This is too important a matter to be choked off or snuffed out, and if there is anybody that wants to be heard I think he should have an opportunity to be heard.

PRESIDENT HOLDOM: You could vote down the motion to lay on the table.

MR. HIRSCHL: I think you will all, in a spirit of fairness, vote it down even if you are opposed to the main motion, so as to give it a hearing. We are lawyers, we know everybody should have his day in court.

PRESIDENT HOLDOM: As Mr. Hirschl remarked, the motion is not debatable, so I therefore will put the motion. The motion before the house is to lay this resolution of Mr. Gresham upon the table. All who are in favor of laying

PROCEEDINGS.

the resolution on the table say aye; all opposed, no. The noes seem to have it. I think I will rule that the noes have it. The question is now upon the resolution, which is debatable. Are there any further remarks?

The question was called for.

MR. CHAPMAN: To discuss this question as it should necessarily be discussed would take until long after the time when we should meet for our afternoon session; the program now will take the balance of the day, as I understand we have to adjourn at four o'clock. There is not opportunity at the present time to give such consideration to the resolution as should be given to it, it is now ten minutes to one, and I move that we take a recess until two o'clock this afternoon.

JUDGE CHURCH: Does this question require any extended debate? It seems to ine the discussion would naturally arise

PRESIDENT HOLDOM: The motion to adjourn is never de

batable.

MR. ADKINSON: This is not a motion to adjourn, but to take a recess.

PRESIDENT HOLDOM: That is a temporary adjournment. Will the gentleman withdraw his motion to take a recess? JUDGE CHURCH: It is not in order and does not need to be withdrawn.

MR. CHAPMAN: Then I move that we adjourn until two o'clock this afternoon.

JUDGE CHURCH: That is not an adjournment.

MR. ADKINSON: A motion to adjourn to a time certain is not a privileged motion that takes precedence over anything that is before the house; a motion to adjourn is priv ileged, but that the gentleman does not make.

PRESIDENT HOLDOM: I will rule that the matter before