lative and judicial functions was little observed. The rescripts of the emperor (or of those authorized to make answers in his name) for the resolution of doubtful cases, the decrees in actions brought by appeal before the imperial court, and the edicts, as well those relating to the administration of the government as for the regulation of private rights, were all embraced under the general designation of constitutiones principum. The great number of these constitutions, and the crudity of many of them, rendered compilations and commentaries indispensable. Among these the principal are the imperial decrees or decisions collected by Paulus; "Rescripts of the Divi Fratres," collected by Papirius Justus; rescripts of Hadrian, compiled by Dositheus; the collection by Ulpian, in his work De Officio Proconsulis, of all the ordinances issued against Christians; and lastly, two general collections (codices) of constitutions from Hadrian to Constantine, the one by Gregorius, the other by Hermogenes (the latter a supplement to the first), both of which consisted chiefly, as is understood, of rescripts. All of these were private compilations, and do not strictly come under the definition of codes as given at the beginning of this article. The Codex Theodosianus, published A. D. 438, by order of Theodosius the Younger, was a compilation of all the edicts of the emperors which were deemed important, and also many of the rescripts. This was a work of great importance, not merely as the initiative of the great work of digesting the whole Roman law afterward completed by Justinian, but for its influence upon several of the Germanic nations, by whom it was adopted or in some degree made the basis of their laws before the revision had been made which is now known by the name of Corpus Juris Civilis. The compilations made by order of Justinian in 528-35, the Institutes, Pandects, and code, and the new constitutions which were published after his death in 565, have been described in the article CIVIL LAW. In the same article will also be found an account of three of the barbaric codes, viz.: the edict of Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths, in 500; the Breviarium Alaricianum, issued by Alaric II., king of the Visigoths, in 506; and the Lex Romana of the Burgundians, published in 517-534. All of these were intended chiefly for Roman subjects. But there were also distinct laws for the barbarians themselves, which it will be proper to notice more in detail. First as to the Franks. There were two tribes, one called Salian (probably from the river Sala, or Yssel, upon which they were first established), the other Ripuarian (from the Latin ripa, the name expressing their location upon the banks of the Rhine). These tribes had separate compilations of laws, which continued in force even after the union of the two tribes under Clovis. Of the Salic law our knowledge is derived from manuscripts still extant, most of which are an unmixed Latin text, but others have an intermixture of Germanic words. The latter are entitled Lex Salica antiqua (or antiquissima, or vetusta), the other Lex Salica recentior (or emendata, or reformata). M. Wiarda, in a work entitled Histoire et explication de la loi salique, has proved that none of the compilations are of an earlier date than the 7th century, and that the manuscripts containing Germanic words and purporting to be the more ancient are in fact later in time than the others. The laws themselves he supposes to have been compiled after the Franks had become established in Belgium, and that they were originally written in Latin. He also concludes that they were not published as a code by public authority, but were compiled from customs and judicial decisions; and that they do not constitute all the laws of the Salian Franks. The earliest historical notice of any such compilation is in the 8th century, in a work called Gesta Francorum. Guizot (Histoire de la civilisation en France) deduces from a critical examination of all the manuscripts that the law is essentially penal. It contains 343 penal articles, and only 65 upon all other subjects. The nature of the crimes and punishments which are specified indicates an exceedingly rude condition of society. There is no generalization, but a chaotic mingling together of the various individual cases of crime that might occur in an uncivilized community, without definition, classification, or any arrangement. One peculiarity is observable, which indeed may be found in the laws of all the Germanic nations at an early period, viz., the extreme mildness of punishments as respects free men, whether Franks or Romans. Pecuniary composition, Wehrgeld or Wiedergeld (prohibition money), was the only penalty prescribed by the Salic law, and this only as a substitute for the right of the injured party to take personal vengeance; but if accepted, the law merely fixed the amount. In respect to slaves it was different; they were subject to cruel corporal punishments, imprisonment, and death. Another peculiarity, which also belonged to the laws of other tribes, was the mode of proof in judicial trials. This was by the oath of compurgators or conjurators, that is to say, a certain number of the friends of the accused who deposed that he had not done what was imputed to him; and on the other hand, conjurators could be produced by the accuser. There was no examination of witnesses nor discussion of the facts, but a simple attestation under oath of the truth of the charge or a denial thereof. The laws of the Ripuarian Franks were essentially the same as those above described, with only the following distinguishing circumstances: 1, that there is more of precision and legislative form, and that the subjects are less exclusively penal; 2, that the mode of proof by compurgators or conjurators is more distinctly regulated; 3, judicial combat is recognized as a mode of deciding controversies. This cus tom seems to have been intended as a check | istics as in those of the Franks and other Gerupon the right of private revenge. If the offended party insisted upon personal vengeance, then it was to be subject to certain terms, and was to be in the presence of witnesses. The Ripuarian laws, it is supposed, were compiled in the 7th century. The laws of the Burgundians are of an earlier period, probably between the years 468 and 534, the latter being the date of the final conquest of the Burgundians by the successors of Clovis. The chief characteristic of those laws is that they apply to Romans and Burgundians alike, and that civil rights and procedure are more prominent than in the laws of the Franks, probably by reason of the great interfusion of Roman law. The capitularies of Charlemagne and several of his successors have been commonly classed among compilations of laws. They are, in truth, the acts of the government in all its functions, including instructions to magistrates, financial regulations, political, civil, and canonical legislation, judicial decisions, even moral precepts, and propositions or questions for consideration. Guizot has arranged the acts of Charlemagne into 1,150 articles. Of these the greater proportion belong to canonical legislation, including under that term the acts of councils and the ordinances of the emperor in relation to affairs of the church. The next most considerable subject is political legislation, relating to administrative offices, courts, and police, and is contained in 293 articles. Penal provisions are numerous, but differ little in character from the previous penal laws of the Ripuarians, Lombards, and other barbarian nations who had become subjects of Charlemagne. There is one exception, in the severity with which he punished the conquered Saxons. Legislation concerning private rights is comparatively inconsiderable. Among the capitularies are some additions to the ancient laws, as the Salic and Ripuarian, the laws of the Lombards, Bavarians, &c.; there are also extracts from these laws, which were probably intended for some particular purpose. It is said that a revision of the Salic law, and of the laws of the Lombards and others, was made by order of Charlemagne, but only fragments of such revision appear in the capitularies. In fact, the capitularies themselves are but fragmentary, many of them being imperfect, and others being referred to which are lost. The most complete edition of the capitularies was published by Baluze (Paris, 1677).-The laws compiled by Alfred the Great in the 9th century have been celebrated as the supposed origin of the peculiarities of the English common law. Trial by jury is commonly referred to this monarch as if first introduced by him. But this is certainly not sustained by authentic evidence. It was a familiar principle in the usages of all the Germanic nations that a free man should be tried only by his peers. In the laws attributed to Alfred we find the same general character manic nations, pecuniary compositions for every species of crime, proof by compurgators, and the like. A law was indeed enacted by Alfred, making wilful murder a capital offence, but it seems not to have been enforced. There is one provision in these laws which may have originated in the humanity of the sovereign, but more probably in the regard which the Anglo-Saxons had for a man's house as being sacred, which feeling has been transmitted to their descendants, and exists to this day. If a man who had committed an injury should keep within his own house, his adversary might besiege him for seven days without attacking him; but if within that time the besieged person should be willing to surrender himself and his arms, his adversary might detain him 30 days, but after that must restore him safe to his kindred, and be content with the compensation prescribed by law. Trial by ordeal and other superstitious methods appear to have been frequent among the Anglo-Saxons. Judicial combat, if in use at all, was seldom resorted to until the Normans substituted it in place of compurgation.-Coming down to a more recent period, we find a peculiar law of custom developed under the feudal system, especially in France. In the southern part of that monarchy, which had been occupied by the Visigoths and Burgundians, the Roman municipal institutions, judicial forms, and rights of property, were to a considerable extent preserved. That part of the country was for that reason called pays du droit écrit. Yet even here, in some districts, many peculiar customs (droits coutumiers) were established in the feudal anarchy. In other provinces, especially the northern, the Roman law was almost entirely lost, at least was no longer distinguishable, and a new system succeeded, of various character, according to the degree of independence maintained by the great feudal lords; and these provinces were designated as pays du droit coutumier. The laws of Normandy are the most important on account of their bearing on the English law of landed property. The customs of the county of Paris were next in importance, as they were regarded as precedents in other districts. Many of these local systems were collected in the Etablissements de St. Louis. In the reign of Charles VII., in 1453, it was decreed by the assembly of the states that all customary laws should be reduced to writing. This brought into distinct and recognized legal existence a vast number of systems, a collection of several hundred of which has been made by Bourdot de Richebourg (Coutumier général, Paris, 1724). This diversity, instead of being relieved by general legislation as the authority of the crown increased, was only made more perplexed by ordonnances not founded upon comprehensive principles, and therefore having no tendency to assimilate the heterogeneous elements before existing, Collections of these ordonnances were repeatedly made, some of which received the inappropriate designation of codes; as the Code Henri, made by Brisson in the reign of Henry III.; the Code Murvillac or Michau, under Louis XIII. (1629), relating to judicial procedure; and the Code Louis XV., by Chaussepierre, 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 revolation paved the way for its accomplishment. It was early the subject of discussion, and projects were reported by Cambacérès in 1793 and 1795, which, though incomplete in details, and on the whole unsatisfactory, yet furnished 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 Préameneu, 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 Conférence du code ciril, avec la discussion particulière du conseil d'état, &c. (Paris, 1805). In the discussion and adjustment of the code, Tronchet, Roederer, Portalis, Thibaudeau, Cambacérès, 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 rédacteur. In the same manner the other codes were reported, discussed, and amended. The whole revision was finally adopted under the title of Les 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 comAnother 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, or 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, not withstanding 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 merce. after the Code Napoléon 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 Frédéric, 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 zakonov, which became the exclusive source of law in 1835. This comprises eight codes, devoted respectively to-1, the state and imperial family; 2, original and incomplete code enacted in 1848. On April 6, 1857, the legislature created a new commission to prepare codes of all the law not covered by the reports of the practice commission, and appointed David Dudley Field, William Curtis Noyes, and Alexander W. Bradford the commissioners, for a term of five years, which was afterward extended for three years further. They reported a political code, a penal code, and a civil code. These codes have not up to the present time been adopted by the legislature of New York; and indeed, although reported by committees, the legislature has always been too much occupied with special legislation to give the necessary time for their consideration. The code of civil procedure, in whole or in part, has been adopted into the laws of 23 states and territories of the Union, viz.: New York, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Kansas, Nebraska, Nevada, California, Oregon, North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Washington, Montana, Idaho, Dakota, Wyoming, Utah, and Arizona. It has also been adopted for the consular courts of the United States in Japan. The code of criminal procedure has been adopted in ten or more states and territories. In California a code commission created by the legislature reported in Janu public services; 3, finance; 4, the classes of persons; 5, civil law; 6, administration; 7, police; 8, penal law. It contains about 38,000 articles, each of which is referred to some preexisting ordinance.-In the United States the first experiment at a legislative remodelling of the entire law was made in Louisiana. That state was originally a French colony; it was afterward ceded to Spain, when the Spanish law was introduced, but again reverted to the French, and from them was acquired by the United States. The confusion of laws introduced by these numerous changes of government made a revision necessary, and a code was prepared and adopted in 1806-'8, which did not, however, supersede the ancient laws, except so far as they conflicted with it. A further revision was found necessary, and in 1822 commissioners were appointed for that purpose, who reported a complete civil code, which was adopted in 1824. Mr. Edward Livingston, one of the commissioners, and who is understood to have had the chief part in the compilation, had been familiar with the common law, and introduced from it many valuable provisions, though the basis of the work was mainly the French civil code. Mr. Livingston also reported a penal code, which was received with favor by the legislature, but not formally adopted. It brought to its author great rep-ary, 1872, a complete series of codes framed utation, especially in Europe. A penal code and code of procedure have since been adopted. The most important, however, of the attempts at codification which have been made in the United States are those of the state of New | York, which had their origin mainly in the able and persistent efforts of David Dudley Field, which he began in 1839, by a public letter on the subject addressed to Gulian C. Verplanck, then a state senator, and continued by a series of addresses to legislative committees, of articles in the newspapers, and of pamphlets. The result of this agitation was that the revised constitution of New York, adopted in 1846, had two separate provisions in relation to codification. The first directed the appointment of three commissioners to re-sylvania had from the organization of the state duce into a code the whole body of the law of the state, or so much thereof as might be deemed expedient. The other directed the appointment of three other commissioners to revise the rules of practice and pleadings in courts of record. Both commissions were filled by the legislature in 1847. The practice commissioners made a partial report on Feb. 29, 1848, containing an incomplete code of civil procedure, in such shape as to cover the principal reforms proposed in the practice of courts of record in civil cases, and this report was immediately adopted by the legislature. The complete codes of civil and criminal procedure were not reported until Dec. 31, 1849, and were never adopted by the legislature, although some portion of the amendments suggested by the commissioners were gradually incorporated by legislation into the text of the upon the basis of the projected New York codes, all of which were adopted by the legislature, to take effect on Jan. 1, 1873. This consisted of a political code, a civil code, a penal code, and a code of civil procedure; the practice in criminal cases being regulated by the penal code. The territory of Dakota in 1864 also adopted the civil and penal codes of the New York commissioners. The principal feature of the code of civil procedure thus adopted in New York and other states was the entire fusion of law and equity by which the same principles were for the first time in the history of New York, or of any other states inheriting the English practice, applied to all species of actions. The courts of Penn decided actions at law upon the principles of equity, but they have never been clothed with all the powers of courts of equity as defined by the English practice. The union in one tribunal of all the powers belonging to a court of chancery as well as to a court of common law, and the application of all the principles of both systems to every controversy arising before the courts, was therefore an absolute novelty in 1848 in any state or colony founded by Englishmen and inheriting English law. The practice in English law courts being entirely different from that of courts of equity, it was necessary to devise a single and homogeneous system including the most useful parts of each form of procedure, and this was done by the code of civil procedure reported by the New York commissioners. Without this preliminary reform it would have been almost im possible to frame an intelligible code of law for an English-speaking community, inasmuch as many elementary questions were disposed of in one court upon precisely the opposite principles from those enforced by the other court. This difficulty being removed, however, it has been found as practicable to reduce the common law of England to the form of a code as the law of any other country. The civil code, defining the rights of individuals as between each other, is the one most interesting to the public at large. This code, as reported in New York and adopted in California and Dakota, consists of three principal divisions, viz., persons, property, and obligations, and a fourth or supplemental division containing general provisions applicable to more than one of the chief divisions already mentioned. Under the head of "Persons" are treated the subjects of personal rights and relations, including marriage, parentage, guardianship, &c., with the rights and duties growing out of them. Under the head of "Property" the rules, conditions, limitations, and incidents of ownership in both real and personal property are stated, including the modes of transfer by grant, will, inheritance, and otherwise. Under the head of "Obligations" the interpretation, transfer, and extinction of obligations are treated, together with the entire subject of contracts, under which special title are set forth the rules governing the creation, interpretation, and extinction of contracts, and the particular rules governing sale, exchange, deposit, loan, hiring of property, personal service, carriage or transportation, trusts or confidential relations, agency, partnership, insurance, indemnity, guaranty, liens (including pledge and mortgage), and negotiable instruments. Under the fourth division there are five titles: 1, relief, including the law of damages, injunctions, specific performance, &c. ; 2, debtor and creditor, including fraudulent transactions, and assignments for the benefit of creditors; 3, nuisance; 4. maxims of jurisprudence; 5, definitions. The civil code of California has, in addition to the matter contained in the New York code, extensive and detailed provisons regulating the management of corporations, and the business of mining, which has in that state an exceptional importance.-The subject of codification has for many years been under discussion in England and the United States, especially since the time of Jeremy Bentham; but the codes framed by the New York commissioners were the first in which any real attempt was made to embody the old law of any English-speaking community. Since their publication the expediency of codification has become a subject of renewed interest in England, and the adoption of a code has been urged not only by private individuals but by members of the present government (1873), with every prospect of ultimate success. A commission was some time since appointed in England to prepare a digest of the existing law as the basis for the construction of a code, and the result of its efforts is generally understood to be strong conviction in the minds of the leaders of the legal profession that a complete code rather than a mere digest must become an absolute necessity. CODEIA (Gr. Kúdeia, head of poppy), an alkaloid found in opium, in which it exists combined, like morphia, with meconic acid. It has the formula CH20NOs. It is soluble in water, alcohol, and ether, but is insoluble in alkaline solutions. It combines with acids to form crystallizable salts. (See OPIUM.) CODEX (Lat.), in Roman antiquity, originally the trunk of a tree, afterward applied to the wooden tablets smeared with wax which were used for writing. At a later period it became the name of all large manuscripts (codices manuscripti), as the works of the historians and poets; and under the emperors and subsequently, it designated collections of civil and ecclesiastical laws. Of the last, the oldest and most celebrated are the Codex Theodosianus, the Codex Justinianus, the Coder Canonum Ecclesiasticorum, belonging to the time of Pope Innocent I., and the Codex Canonum Ecclesia universa, revised by the monk Dionysius about 527. Its principal modern application is to the uncial manuscripts of the New Testament, as the codices Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, Ephraemi, Beza or Cantabrigiensis, Claromontanus, &c., 41 in all, which are also designated by the Roman letters, as codices A, B, C, D, or by combinations, as F, W, or by the Greek letters, as A, 0.-A codex rescriptus (Lat., a rewritten codex), now usually termed a palimpsest, is an ancient parchment on which the original writing has been defaced, and a different composition copied. CODICIL (Lat. codicillus, diminutive of coder), an addition or supplement to a will, requiring the same formalities of execution and the same testamentary capacity. The distinction between the two formerly was, that by a will an executor was appointed, and by a codicil not; but now an executor may be appointed by either or by neither, and the codicil is employed to meet changes of purpose on the part of the testator, and to provide for new circumstances. A will and codicil are to be construed together, and the latter, as the more recent expression of the testator's purpose, will modify and control the other wherever they are not in harmony; but in other particulars the will is to stand. There may be several codicils to a will, all of which must be probated with it; but any one may be rejected for want of the legal requisites, and the others will remain and have effect as if that had never been made. COD-LIVER OIL, the oil drained or expressed from the livers of the cod, and also of the pollock, hake, and haddock, largely used in medicine. Other fish oils are sometimes fraudulently substituted; the adulteration is to be detected by the taste and smell, the ab |