A law passed last winter, appointed three Commissioners of the Code to perform the duties specified in the 17th section of article I. of the Constitution, and authorised the Governor to fill any vacancy which might occur during the recess of the Legislature. Two of these Commissioners have resigned. The resignation of Mr. Spencer was on the 25th of June last; that of Mr. Worden took effect on the 1st day of November. Under the power conferred by the law, I have endeavored to fill the vacancies in a manner calculated to ensure the object contemplated by the act and by the Constitution, and have offered the appointments to a number of the most eminent jurists of the state. The vacancies, however, still exist. As they occurred during the recess of the Legislature, the power to fill them under the act is probably with the Governor. But as I have not succeeded in the exercise of the power, before the Legislature has convened, and as, in my opinion, an alteration of the law organising the Commission is essential to its practical success, I respectfully refer the matter to your consideration, and shall abstain from any efforts to fill the Commission during your sittings, or until there shall be an expression of your opinion on the subject.

The principal difficulty in filling the existing vacancies, arises from the inadequacy of the compensation allowed, and the limitation of time compared with the magnitude of the labor to be accomplished. The restriction of time imposed by the existing law, is fatal to the accomplishment of the work. The undertaking "to reduce into a written and systematic code the whole body of the law of this state," is too vast to be accomplished under the pendency of such a pressure, or to be completed by the labors of three men within two years. Í therefore recommend an increase of the compensation of the Commissioners, and an extension of the time limited for their continuance in office.

It is a subject of not unfrequent complaint, that the due administration of public justice is often impeded in consequence of the present mode of empannelling jurors in criminal cases, and of the exercise of the right of challenge by the traverser, and by the manner of conducting the trial and defence.

Trials attended with any notoriety, are apt to involve great consumption of time in the scrutiny of the jury. Weeks have been consumed in this effort in a single cause; and I am informed by one of the Justices of the Supreme Court, that in a trial before him, upwards of four thousand persons were examined in a fruitless endeavor to empannel a jury. I understand that the Commissioners to revise the rules and practice of the courts, will submit to your consideration a proposition intended to obviate the difficulty which has been experienced in this particular. Not having had the opportunity to examine the alterations which they propose, I cannot express an opinion upon their suggestion; but the subject is one of importance, and will, I hope, engage your early attention.

The experience of those familiar with the proceedings in the criminal courts, has suggested the propriety of allowing to the prosecution

a limited number of peremptory challenges. I am convinced that the ends of justice would thereby be advanced.

The allowance of bills of exceptions, is believed to be a principal cause of the delays and protracted trials in criminal cases, and of the occasional failure of justice. Prior to the adoption of the Revised Statutes, criminal trials were reviewed by the courts reserving the point in dispute for the consideration of the Supreme Court on a case made; when, if the point did not affect the merits, the court was at liberty to disregard it. Upon bills of exception, however, the whole case is not sent up, but only enough for a proper understanding of the single point raised; and if the ruling on that point be erroneous, however immaterial it may be to the main question of guilt or innocence, a new trial must be granted. The effect is, that the judge on the trial, unwilling to embarrass the case by exceptions, or to give the accused the chance to avoid the consequences of a verdict of guilty by exceptions on points really immaterial, is tempted to relax the rules of evidence, and to let in almost any testimony which may be offered.

A serious defect exists either in our statutes relating to summary convictions upon the charge of vagrancy, or in the practice under those statutes. These proceedings involve a wide departure from the principle which pervades our whole jurisprudence, and which secures to every person accused of an offence a trial by jury; they are, therefore, justly regarded with jealousy, and should be restrained by stringent rules for the protection of personal liberty.

While public policy undoubtedly indicates the necessity of placing under restraint and discipline those who lead an idle life, without employment, and without the visible means of support, it also indicates, with equal certainty, the distinction which should be observed between them and the willfully corrupt. A distinction is recognised by our statutes between different individuals, whom it classes under the general name of "vagrants;" some are recognised as proper objects for the poor house, while others are to be committed to the common jail. But in practice, it is believed that nearly all the commitments for vagrancy are to the county prisons; thus merging the distinction (so essential to justice and to the moral elevation and reformation of the vagrant, as well as to the effective punishment of the criminal,) between poverty and crime; and commingling, in a common disgrace and punishment, those whose chief fault is destitution or perhaps disease, with those who have been convicted of a willful transgression of the law.

I have been led to these remarks by an investigation made during the past year, and embodied in the presentment of a grand jury, in which it is represented that of seven hundred and forty-six persons at that time confined in the Penitentiary of the city of New-York, upon the charge of vagrancy, whose commitments had been examined, two hundred and twenty were confined "for matters which do not "constitute vagrancy under any description of it," as defined by our statutes, but "because the offence charged is poverty, sickness, or destitution," while of the whole number of seven hundred and forty

six, only three were lawfully imprisoned. Such a fact calls imperatively for an examination of the statutes under which such transactions have occurred.

While it is admittedly a primary duty of the Legislature to enact laws for the punishment of vice, it is no less its duty to remove, the causes which frequently lead to the commission of crime. The impressions made upon the youthful mind by the gentle force of parental authority and example, and by the associations of the family circle, are among the most active and enduring of the influences which control the conduct of after life. Much of the vice that we are called upon to deplore, may be traced to the early removal of its subject from the reach of that authority and example, and from the innocent but wholesome associations of a home, however humble. The cause of morality, no less than the dictates of humanity, demand the preservation of the family circle, and the maintenance of the family home, as efficient preventives of vice, and sure and permanent contributors to individual virtue and happiness, and to public prosperity and order.

In this view it becomes us to consider whether the causes by which this wholesome influence is often broken up, may not be removed or lessened.

Doubtless the most frequent cause of dismemberment of families is found in the pecuniary inability of the parent to maintain his household establishment.

The humane and wise policy of the State, many years since, provided an exemption from execution for debt, of sundry articles in favor of persons being householders. The list of articles thus exempted has at various times been enlarged at all times in favor of persons being householders, and so as to embrace articles essential to the maintenance of the household establishment, and to prevent the dismemberment of families. And yet the wise policy of the law often fails of its object, and the household is dispersed for want of an abode, wherein the pleasures of an undivided family may alone be left to sweeten the hours of adversity, and to cheer and stimulate its members in their efforts to repair their misfortunes while they retain their virtue.

It is this consideration which induces me to suggest a further extension of the present exemption, so as to exempt from sale upon execution, the premises occupied as a Homestead, to a limited value.

The most exact observance of the rights of property, and of the inviolability of contracts, should characterize all legislation in a civilized government. An essential feature, therefore, of any law for this purpose, should be its careful and scrupulous avoidance of the violation of any existing rights. The exemption should not extend to contracts made before the enactment of the law, but should be prospective in its operation, and the homestead should not be exempt from a debt incurred for its purchase.

I submit these as among the guards which should attend the exemption; relying, however, upon the wisdom of the Legislature, should it think proper to consider the subject, to suggest and mature

such provisions as will carefully protect the rights of the creditor, and guard against the commission of fraud, while they may effect much in the cause of humanity toward the prevention of crime, the relief of poverty, and the support and education of the young and the helpless.

The policy of our government and of our institutions is wisely adverse to large standing armies. Our reliance is therefore upon the militia organized and armed in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Constitution, and the laws of Congress in pursuance thereof. The condition of this force within our State is highly satisfactory. Prior to the enactment of the law of 1847, for the reorganization of the militia, the system had become obnoxious to large numbers in the community, and the militia service was regarded with disfavor, except, in the various uniformed corps, which did not exist to any great extent out of the cities and the large towns: and the trainings of the militia came to be regarded as an uselessly onerous burthen to the people.

The object of the militia laws of 1847 and '48, was to provide a thorough enrolment of all persons in the State liable to military duty -to offer larger inducements and thereby to increase the number of uniformed companies-to advance their efficiency, and at the same time to lessen the expense both in time and money to which the members were subject, and to relieve the mass of the citizens from the burthens of the previous law.

The organization under these new laws progresses but slowly. Like every new system, this has its defects, which were not foreseen at the time of its enactment, but which it is hoped can be remedied by the Legislature, as they are developed in practice. Some of these defects will be pointed out, and the remedy will be suggested, in the report of the Adjutant General, to which I solicit your early attention.

It is estimated that there are near 300,000 persons in the State liable to military duty, and yet the number enrolled the present year is returned at only 87,595. These returns are very imperfect. They embrace but about one-third of the State. It is particularly important that you direct your attention to such an amendment of the laws as will ensure full and accurate returns, and an early organization of the entire body of the militia.

Notwithstanding the delays and difficulties which have embarrassed a new system, 233 uniform companies have been organized under the late acts, in addition to others previously in existence-thus presenting a strong, efficient and reliable force, constantly increasing, ready and willing to sustain the laws of the State, and to fulfil the duties imposed upon them by the Constitution of the United States.

The report of the Commissary General will present to you the condition of the State property entrusted to the care of this officer. The laws relating to this department require a thorough revision. I am induced to believe that some alterations will be suggested in the report of the Commissary General, to which I beg leave to call your

attention.

Few subjects affect more intimately the interests and convenience of the people, than the means of safe, speedy, and widely extended social and commercial communication. There are now in operation within the State, twenty-five railroad companies, and upwards of eleven hundred miles of road, upon which daily vast numbers of human beings are carried. In judging of the future, it would be difficult to form an adequate conception of the immense stream of travel and commerce which will flow over these great highways, at no distant day, when they shall have penetrated the yet sequestered regions of the State, and when the trade of the great West, still in its infancy, shall have reached its full growth and magnitude. It is the duty of a wise government to encourage enterprises which tend, like our railways, to approximate distant parts of the State, to destroy sectional interests, to explore and bring into social and commercial relations districts hitherto almost inaccessible, and to increase largely the sale of agricultural products, by bringing the best market near to the door of the producer. So, on the other hand, the great and rapid extension of the railway system calls for such judicious legislative regulations as will more adequately secure the protection of life, and the largest degree of safety, coupled with comfort, and the requisite rate of speed.

The frequency of accidents and collisions naturally leads to enquiry into the causes, and the proper remedy to be applied to the prevention of so great an evil. It cannot be doubted that a large proportion of these accidents arises from the use of a single track, by cars running in opposite directions. The subject is eminently worthy of legislative attention, with a view to afford every just facility for the construction of railroads, and at the same time to enforce prudent regulations for the security of human life.

While the power of the Legislature to authorise, by a general law, the taking of private property for public use, in other cases than where the constitution sanctions a delegation of local legislative authority to the boards of supervisors, may well be questioned, there exist strong reasons why the exercise of so important a branch of sovereign prerogative should not be surrendered, in this way, to private associations without great caution. Provision, has, however, already been made by law, for the exercise of the right to decide the public utility of highways, turnpikes and plank roads, by the local authorities of the counties within or through which such improvements are designed, and under proper restrictions it might be sound policy to extend the benefit of similar provisions to the construction of railroads. Beside the plain and strict compliance with the provisions of the constitution which such a system would present, in connection with the general law authorising companies to incorporate themselves, it would take from these corporations every ingredient of exclusive privilege, and would relieve the Legislature from the weight and burthen of a large amount of duty entailed upon it under the present system, and would prevent, in a great degree, the interference of speculating enterprises, or of measures prompted by the anticipation of gain, with the consideration and the decision of other questions of public importance.