EVOLUTION OF LAW.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVII, Issue 5051, 12 November 1926, Page 3

EVOLUTION OF LAW.

INTERESTING REVIEW. EVER WIDENING PROCESS. A sketchy, but nevertheless very interesting, review of the development df law was given by Mr J. W. Poynton, S.M., before the Matamata branch of the Justices of the Peace Association recently. Mr Poynton said that among the earliest records of law were those of King Hamu-Rabi, about 7000 to 10,000 B.C. This record was called a “Stele?’ and was carved in stone. In modem times we had the “Code Napoleon.” In Himu-Rabi’s time there was no law-giving genius like Moses, but the ancient King’s laws insisted upon obedience to parents and the State. A man who put water into the ■milk for sale wasi to, be drowned in the vessel 'from which the water was taken. A baker who sold light-weight bread was to be baked in his own oven. In Greece the Athenians assembled in the forum or market place for weeks together and made the lawsThe Roman praetors had great power, and pass ed laws which were the rule of the land. They .Were ultimately consolidated into some five laws called the “Institutes Justiniajn.” They defined the rights of masters over slaves and gave direction in many other affairs of life. The legal instinct in these people was vehy strong. It was a peculiar thing, however, that although the Romans were in England tor over 400 years they left very little trace in pur laws. One thing that they did was to institute tri# by jury, and this had remained to the present day. There was at one; time a system whereby companies of ten men .were made responsible for each other’s conduct, and if one man offended the others had to make him pay the penalty, or pay it themselves. But the system broke down, for it was found that when one of the ten offended the whole ten would swear that none of their number hajd anything to do with the crime. William of (Orange; swept the system away. Judges were then chosen from the barons, and as the affair's of State increased it was found more and more necessary to have justices.

It w,as only 300 years since judges became independent. The reigning sovereign used to deprive th© judges of their positions, if their decision did no suit him. The Stuarts: inflicted heavy taxation, and the people applied to the judges 'for relief, but found that) o.wing to the King’s power the judges were ineffective. Unfortunately, Cromwell perpetuated the same vicious system. When William of Orange came to the throne the people made two splendid bargains. Firstly, they insisted upon, the independence of the judges, and the subserviency of the arjmy to parliament and not to the King. In Germany the army had been under the Kaiser, but in England the parliament passed the. financial arrangements for the pay of the atyny. I'f this. vote, was not passed the army simply dissolved. The judges’ salaries were fixed before the actual appointments jvere made, and neither King nor cottager could reduce them. A judge could not be dismissed except by a vote of both houses of parliament. We thus had the bes.t of judges ; none hajd ever been indicted for bribery, nor ■was their independence in any way sapped. This was a cardinal principle of the British system, and was absolutely essential to the even-hand-ed administration of justice.

Justices of the Peace and all who had anything to do with the administration of the law should see to it that their actions were beyond reproach. I’f a justice found that a, great friend or rejative was concerned in a case that was to coftne before him he should hand the case over to another justice, and never give cause for any reproach. He should never listerr to any representations beforehand from parties interested, and .he should by every means preserve the integrity of his office from interference from either private or political quarters.

The law was. not a matter solely for the legal fraternity. One of the greatest reforms ever made, in the law was effected by one Torrens, of Australia, who 1 was responsible for the reduction of the multitudinous documents relative to the trajis.fer of property to a single document. He had achieved this in spite of the opposition df all the legal experts. The experts we,re not always irifallible.

The British system of lajw would go on evolving and expanding until it was applied to all the world, and thereby justice would shine with a greater lustre. !