OCR Text |
Show "LEGAL PHRASEOLOGY." When an ordinarily intelligent man mlspro-nounces mlspro-nounces a word or uses a wrong word in conversation, conversa-tion, there is a possibility that some one may smiie. When an ordinarily intelligent man misspells a word or uses a wrong word in writing, his readers wonder at the ignorance of the writer. But whr.i an ordinarily intelligent nirtti'bi elected to the legislature, legis-lature, to make laws to guide ami govern the poo-pi:; poo-pi:; of a sovereign state, hi bills are prvprtmit?d in the statutes of that .state, and henceforth imuI forever for-ever they go thundering down tli ? corridors ef time, furnishing courts and lawyers with a terminology termi-nology all their own, constant misuse of-tiie word finally making those bulls jrood legal phrasool jgy. In the statutes of the American stales there is a certain ill-tlclined and chaotic meuniug attaching to the verbosity which laws need to make then intangible, a certain ungrammaticil vagueness, together with a pretentiousness which renders them all too ponderous for the layman to translate. ) The best laws are those which leave everything in a haze, and the best lawyers are those whose subtle training enables them to pick the flaw and prove the whole thing unconstitutional or contrary to public, policy. , Legislatures arc made up mostly of ordinary men." Most members have active minds, and we believe most of them have a clear perception of the intention of their bills. But in reducing their ideas to words that intention is very often lost by. a lack of facility of expression, or is buried in a mass of eccentric legal phraseology which lenders the thought as, phantomlike as a will o' the wip. There seems to be a meaning lurking behind the words, but it is so subtly concealed in the labyrinth-ian labyrinth-ian and frequently ungrammatical construction of the sentences that even the judicial minds of the highest courts of the laud have been perplexed. The courts ..have held that some laws should be liberally construed; others must be strictly construed. con-strued. Just how the distinction between the two classes made is as hard to understand as are the statutes. But no doubt long judicial training has developed the perceptive qualities of the bench until un-til they outweigh the reflective and imaginative. A long time ago some legislator made the word "aliened," and used it for "alienated." Aliened is now good, legal phraseology. It; was a legislator who gave the governor power to "convene" the legislature in extra session, though the governor has consistently "convoked" that body when occasion occa-sion demanded. It was a legislator who provided for scholarships for pupils of ability when he meant pupils of capacity. He it was, too, who required re-quired men to reply to questions rather than answer an-swer them. And he has made an Indian an ab-originee, ab-originee, whereas he is one of the aboriginecs. "Alien citizen" is .one of his choicest specimens. ."Insofar as" may have been borrowed for special I use in the statutes, and it is probably good legal phraseology. There is, of course, no authority on earth to defend "insofar," as one word, but the whole expression would be much improved by simply sim-ply saying that one part of a law is applicable "so far as" not consistent with another. The "in" is entirely superfluous. 1 Some remedy should be devised to prevent the . indiscriminate addition to "good law terms" of the many, freak words, and expressions hich come into f - the statutes with each session of the state legislatures. legisla-tures. The unintelligible and illogical should be eliminated. The long and involved sentences, which, if they mean anything, could have that meaning better expressed in fewer words and shorter sentences, should be revised before (enactment (enact-ment into law. Intention should be clearly expressed ex-pressed and be susceptible of not more than one meaning in that expression. But no! that would be a calamity, for if laws were clear and unmistakable in their meaning there would be a lot of lawyers who would have to adopt other professions, and the other professions are already al-ready so well supplied that an addition of the legal talent, with all its learned "legal phraseology" would inevitably drive other professional men to the poorhouse. . m . |