[1] The spelling "cocoa-nut," which introduces a confusion with cocoa
(q.v.) or cacao, is a corruption of the original Portuguese form,
dating from (and largely due to) Johnson's _Dictionary_. The spelling
"coker-nut," introduced to avoid the same ambiguity, is common in
England.
COCYTUS (mod. _Vuvo_), a tributary of the Acheron, a river of Thesprotia
(mod. _pashalik_ of Iannina), which flows into the Ionian Sea about 20
m. N. of the Gulf of Arta. The name is also applied in Greek mythology
to a tributary of the Acheron or of the Styx, a river in Hades. The
etymology suggested is from [Greek: kokuein], to wail, in allusion to
the cries of the dead. Virgil describes it as the river which surrounds
the underworld (_Aen._ vi. 132).
COD, the name given to the typical fish of the family _Gadidae_, of the
Teleostean suborder Anacanthini, the position of which has much varied
in our classifications. Having no spines to their fins, the Gadids used,
in Cuvierian days, to be associated with the herrings, Salmonids, pike,
&c., in the artificially-conceived order of Malacopterygians, or
soft-finned bony fishes. But, on the ground of their air-bladder being
closed, or deprived of a pneumatic duct communicating with the digestive
canal, such as is characteristic of the Malacopterygians, they were
removed from them and placed with the flat-fishes, or _Pleuronectidae_,
in a suborder Anacanthini, regarded as intermediate in position between
the Acanthopterygians, or spiny-finned fishes, and the Malacopterygians.
It has, however, been shown that the flat-fishes bear no relationship to
the Gadids, but are most nearly akin to the John Dories (see DORY).
The suborder Anacanthini is, nevertheless, maintained for the
_Muraenolepididae_ Gadids and two related families, _Macruridae_ and
_Muraenolepididae_, and may be thus defined:--Air-bladder without open
duct. Parietal bones separated by the supra-occipital; prootic and
exoccipital separated by the enlarged opisthotic. Pectoral arch
suspended from the skull: no mesocoracoid arch. Ventral fins below or in
front of the pectorals, the pelvic bones posterior to the clavicular
symphysis and only loosely attached to it by ligament. Fins without
spines; caudal fin, if present, without expanded hypural, perfectly
symmetrical, and supported by the neural and haemal spines of the
posterior vertebrae, and by basal bones similar to those supporting the
dorsal and anal rays. This type of caudal fin must be regarded as
secondary, the _Gadidae_ being, no doubt, derived from fishes in which
the homocercal fin of the typical Teleostean had been lost.
About 120 species of Gadids are distinguished, mostly marine, many being
adapted to life at great depths; all are carnivorous. They inhabit
chiefly the northern seas, but many abyssal forms occur between the
tropics and in the southern parts of the Atlantic and Pacific. They are
represented in British waters by eight genera, and about twenty species,
only one of which, the burbot (_Lota vulgaris_), is an inhabitant of
fresh waters. Several of the marine species are of first-rate economic
importance. The genus _Gadus_ is characterized by having three dorsal
and two anal fins, and a truncated or notched caudal fin. In the cod and
haddock the base of the first anal fin is not, or but slightly, longer
than that of the second dorsal fin; in the whiting, pout, coal-fish,
pollack, hake, ling and burbot, the former is considerably longer than
the latter.
The cod, _Gadus morrhua_, possesses, in common with the other members of
the genus, three dorsal and two anal fins, and a single barbel, at least
half as long as the eye, at the chin. It is a widely-distributed
species, being found throughout the northern and temperate seas of
Europe, Asia and America, extending as far south as Gibraltar, but not
entering the Mediterranean, and inhabits water from 25 to 50 fathoms
deep, where it always feeds close to the bottom. It is exceedingly
voracious, feeding on the smaller denizens of the ocean--fish,
crustaceans, worms and molluscs, and greedily taking almost any bait the
fisherman chooses to employ. The cod spawns in February, and is
exceedingly prolific, the roe of a single female having been known to
contain upwards of eight millions of ova, and to form more than half the
weight of the entire fish. Only a small proportion of these get
fertilized, and still fewer ever emerge from the egg. The number of cod
is still further reduced by the trade carried on in roe, large
quantities of which are used in France as ground-bait in the sardine
fishery, while it also forms an article of human food. The young are
about an inch in length by the end of spring, but are not fit for the
market till the second year, and it has been stated that they do not
reach maturity, as shown by the power of reproduction, till the end of
their third year. They usually measure about 3 ft. in length, and weigh
from 12 to 20 lb, but specimens have been taken from 50 to 70 lb in
weight.
As an article of food the cod-fish is in greatest perfection during the
three months preceding Christmas. It is caught on all parts of the
British and Irish coasts, but the Dogger Bank, and Rockall, off the
Outer Hebrides, have been specially noted for their cod-fisheries. The
fishery is also carried on along the coast of Norfolk and Suffolk, where
great quantities of the fish are caught with hook and line, and conveyed
to market alive in "well-boats" specially built for this traffic. Such
boats have been in use since the beginning of the 18th century. The most
important cod-fishery in the world is that which has been prosecuted for
centuries on the Newfoundland banks, where it is not uncommon for a
single fisherman to take over 500 of these fish in ten or eleven hours.
These, salted and dried, are exported to all parts of the world, and
form, when taken in connexion with the enormous quantity of fresh cod
consumed, a valuable addition to the food resources of the human race.
The air-bladder of this fish furnishes isinglass, little, if at all,
inferior to that obtained from the sturgeon, while from the liver is
obtained cod-liver oil, largely used in medicine as a remedy in
scrofulous complaints and pulmonary consumption (see Cod-liver Oil).
"The Norwegians," says Cuvier, "give cod-heads with marine plants to
their cows for the purpose of producing a greater proportion of milk.
The vertebrae, the ribs, and the bones in general, are given to their
cattle by the Icelanders, and by the Kamtchatdales to their dogs. These
same parts, properly dried, are also employed as fuel in the desolate
steppes of the Icy Sea."
At Port Logan in Wigtonshire cod-fish are kept in a large reservoir,
scooped out of the solid rock by the action of the sea, egress from
which is prevented by a barrier of stones, which does not prevent the
free access of the water. These cod are fed chiefly on mussels, and when
the keeper approaches to feed them they may be seen rising to the
surface in hundreds and eagerly seeking the edge. They have become
comparatively tame and familiar. Frank Buckland, who visited the place,
states that after a little while they allowed him to take hold of them,
scratch them on the back, and play with them in various ways. Their
flavour is considered superior to that of the cod taken in the open sea.
(G. A. B.)
CODA (Ital. for "tail"; from the Lat. _cauda_), in music, a term for a
passage which brings a movement or a separate piece to a conclusion.
This developed from the simple chords of a cadence into an elaborate and
independent form. In a series of variations on a theme or in a
composition with a fixed order of subjects, the "coda" is a passage
sufficiently contrasted with the conclusions of the separate variations
or subjects, added to form a complete conclusion to the whole. Beethoven
raised the "coda" to a feature of the highest importance.
CODE (Lat. _codex_), the term for a complete and systematic body of law,
or a complete and exclusive statement of some portion of the law; and so
by analogy for any system of rules or doctrine; also for an arrangement
in telegraphy, signalling, &c., by which communications may be made
according to rules adopted for brevity or secrecy.
In jurisprudence the question of the reduction of laws to written codes,
representing a complete and readily accessible system, is a matter of
great historical and practical interest. Many collections of laws,
however, which are commonly known as codes,[1] would not correspond to
the definition given above. The Code of Justinian (see JUSTINIAN I.;
ROMAN LAW), the most celebrated of all, is not in itself a complete and
exclusive system of law. It is a collection of imperial constitutions,
just as the Pandects are a collection of the opinions of jurisconsults.
The Code and the Pandects together being, as Austin says, "digests of
Roman law in force at the time of their conception," would, if properly
arranged, constitute a code. Codification in this sense is merely a
question of the _form_ of the laws, and has nothing to do with their
goodness or badness from an ethical or political point of view.
Sometimes codification only means the changing of unwritten into written
law; in the stricter sense it means the changing of unwritten or
badly-written law into law well written.
The same causes which made collections of laws necessary in the time of
Justinian have led to similar undertakings among modern peoples. The
actual condition of laws until the period when they are consciously
remodelled is one of confusion, contradiction, repetition and disorder;
and to these evils the progress of society adds the burden of
perpetually increasing legislation. Some attempt must be made to
simplify the task of learning the laws by improving their expression and
arrangement. This is by no means an easy task in any country, but in
England it is surrounded with peculiar difficulties. The independent
character of English law has prevented an attempt to do what has already
been done for other systems which have the basis of the Roman law to
fall back upon.
The most celebrated modern code is the French. The necessity of a code
in France was mainly caused by the immense number of separate systems of
jurisprudence existing in that country before 1789, justifying
Voltaire's sarcasm that a traveller in France had to change laws about
as often as he changed horses. At first published under the title of
_Code Civil des Francais_, it was afterwards entitled the _Code
Napoleon_ (q.v.)--the emperor Napoleon wishing to attach his name to a
work which he regarded as the greatest glory of his reign. The code, it
has been said, is the product of Roman and customary law, together with
the ordinances of the kings and the laws of the Revolution. In form it
has passed through several changes caused by the political vicissitudes
of the country, and it has of course suffered from time to time
important alterations in substance, but it still remains virtually the
same in principle as it left the hands of its framers. The code has
produced a vast number of commentaries, among which may be named those
of A. Duranton, R. T. Troplong and J. C. F. Demolombe. The remaining
French codes are the _Code de procedure civile_, the _Code de commerce_,
the _Code d'instruction criminelle_ and the _Code penal_. The merits of
the French code have entered into the discussion on the general question
of codification. Austin agrees with Savigny in condemning the ignorance
and haste with which it was compiled. "It contains," says Austin, "no
definitions of technical terms (even the most leading), no exposition of
the _rationale_ of distinctions (even the most leading), no exposition
of the broad principles and rules to which the narrower provisions
expressed in the code are subordinate; hence its fallacious brevity."
Codes modelled on the French code have, however, taken firm root in most
of the countries of continental Europe and in other parts of the world
as well, such as Latin America and several of the British colonies.
The Prussian code (_Code Frederic_) was published by Frederick the Great
in 1751. It was intended to take the place of "Roman, common Saxon and
other foreign subsidiary laws and statutes," the provincial laws
remaining in force as before. One of the objects of the king was to
destroy the power of the advocates, whom he hoped to render useless.
This, with other systems of law existing in Germany, has been replaced
by the Civil Code of 1900 (see GERMANY).
The object of all these codes has been to frame a common system to take
the place of several systems of law, rather than to restate in an exact
and exhaustive form the whole laws of a nation, which is the problem of
English codification. The French and Prussian codes, although they have
been of great service in simplifying the law, have failed to prevent
outside themselves that accumulation of judiciary and statute law which
in England has been the chief motive for codification. A more exact
parallel to the English problem may be found in the _Code of the State
of New York_. The revised constitution of the state, as adopted in 1846,
"ordered the appointment of two commissions, one to reduce into a
written and a systematic code the whole body of the law of the state,
and the other to revise, reform, simplify and abridge the rules and
practice, pleadings, &c., of the courts of record." By an act of 1847,
the state legislature declared that the body of substantive law should
be contained in three codes--the Political, the Civil and the Penal. The
works of both commissions, completed in 1865, filled six volumes,
containing the Code of Civil Procedure (including the law of evidence),
the Book of Forms, the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Political Code,
the Penal Code and the Civil Code. In the introduction to the Civil Code
it was claimed that in many departments of the law the codes "provided
for every possible case, so that when a new case arises it is better
that it should be provided for by new legislation." The New York code
was defective in the important points of definition and arrangement. It
formed the basis, however, of the present codes of civil and criminal
procedure in the state of New York. Much interest has attached to the
Penal Code drawn up by Edward Livingston (q.v.) for the state of
Louisiana. The system consists of a Code of Crime and Punishments, a
Code of Procedure, a Code of Evidence, a Code of Reform and Prison
Discipline, and a Book of Definitions. "Though the state for which the
codes were prepared," said Chief Justice Chase, "neglected to avail
itself of the labours assigned and solicited by itself, they have
proved, together with their introductions, a treasure of suggestions to
which many states are indebted for useful legislation." Most of the
other states in the United States have codes stating the law of pleading
in civil actions, and such states are often described as code states to
distinguish them from those adhering to the older forms of action,
divided between those at law and those at equity. A few states have
general codes of political and civil rights. The general drift of
legislation and of public sentiment in the United States is towards the
extension of the principle of codification, but the contrary view has
been ably maintained (see J. C. Carter, _Provinces of the Written and
the Unwritten Law_, New York, 1889).
Since the time of Bentham, the codification of the law of England has
been the dream of the most enlightened jurists and statesmen. In the
interval between Bentham and our own time there has been an immense
advance in the scientific study of law, but it may be doubted whether
the problem of codification is at all nearer solution. Interest has
mainly been directed to the historical side of legal science, to the
phenomena of the evolution of laws as part of the development of
society, and from this point of view the question of remodelling the law
is one of minor interest. To Bentham the problem presented itself in the
simplest and most direct form possible. What he proposed to do was to
set forth a body of laws, clearly expressed, arranged in the order of
their logical connexion, exhibiting their own _rationale_ and excluding
all other law. On the other hand the problem has in some respects become
easier since the time of Bentham. With the Benthamite codification the
conception of reform in the substantive law is more or less mixed up. If
codification had been possible in his day, it would, unless it had been
accompanied by the searching reforms which have been effected since, and
mainly through his influence, perhaps have been more of an evil than a
good. The mere dread that, under the guise of codification or
improvement in form, some change in substance may secretly be effected
has long been a practical obstacle in the way of legal reform. But the
law has now been brought into a state of which it may be said that, if
it is not the best in all respects that might be desired, it is at least
in most respects as good as the conditions of legislation will permit it
to be. Codification, in fact, may now be treated purely as a question of
form. What is proposed is that the law, being, as we assume, in
substance what the nation wishes it to be, should be made as accessible
as possible, and as intelligible as possible. These two essential
conditions of a sound system of law are, we need hardly say, far from
being fulfilled in England. The law of the land is embodied in thousands
of statutes and tens of thousands of reports. It is expressed in
language which has never been fixed by a controlling authority, and
which has swayed about with every change of time, place and
circumstance. It has no definitions, no rational distinctions, no
connexion of parts. Until the passing of the Judicature Act of 1873 it
was pervaded throughout its entire sphere by the flagrant antinomy of
law and equity, and that act has only ordered, not executed, its
consolidation. No lawyer pretends to know more than a fragment of it.
Few practical questions can be answered by a lawyer without a search
into numberless acts of parliament and reported cases. To laymen, of
course, the whole law is a sealed book. As there are no authoritative
general principles, it happens that the few legal maxims known to the
public, being apprehended out of relation to their authorities, are as
often likely to be wrong as to be right. It is hopeless to think of
making it possible for every man to be his own lawyer, but we can at
least try to make it possible for a lawyer to know the whole law. The
earlier advocates of codification founded their case mainly on the evils
of judiciary law, _i.e._ the law contained in the reported decisions of
the judges. Bentham's bitter antipathy to judicial legislation is well
known. Austin's thirty-ninth lecture (_Lectures_, ed. 1869) contains an
exhaustive criticism of the tenable objections to judiciary law. All
such law is embedded in decisions on particular cases, from which it
must be extracted by a tedious and difficult process of induction. Being
created for particular cases it is necessarily uncomprehensive,
imperfect, uncertain and bulky. These are evils which are incident to
the nature of judiciary laws. The defective form of the existing statute
law, moreover, has also given rise to loud complaints. Year by year the
mass of legislation grows larger, and as long as the basis of a system
is judiciary law, it is impossible that the new statutes can be
completely integrated therewith. The mode of framing acts of parliament,
and especially the practice of legislating by reference to previous
acts, likewise produce much uncertainty and disorder. Some progress has,
however, been made by the passing from time to time of various acts
codifying branches of law, such as the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, the
Partnership Act 1890, the Trusts Act 1893, and the Interpretation Act
1889.
The Statute Law Revision Committee also perform a useful work in
excising dead law from the statute-book, partly by repeal of obsolete
and spent acts and parts of acts, and partly by pruning redundant
preambles and words. The construction of a section of an act may depend
on the preamble and the context, and the repeal of the preamble and
certain parts of the act may therefore affect the construction of what
is left. This is provided for by a clause which is said to have been
settled by Lord Westbury. It provides (in effect) that the repeal of any
words or expressions of enactment shall not affect the construction of
any statute or part of a statute. The lawyer, therefore, cannot rely on
the revised edition of the statutes alone, and it is still necessary for
him to consult the complete act as it was originally enacted.
The process of gradual codification adopted in India has been
recommended for imitation in England by those who have had some
experience of its working. The first of the Indian codes was the Penal
Code (see CRIMINAL LAW), and there are also codes of civil and criminal
procedure.
Whether any attempt will ever be made to supersede this vast and
unarranged mass by a complete code seems very doubtful. Writers on
codification have for the most part insisted that the work should be
undertaken as a whole, and that the parts should have relation to some
general scheme of the law which should be settled first. The practical
difficulties in the way of an undertaking so stupendous as the
codification _uno coetu_ of the whole mass of the law hardly require to
be stated.
In discussions on codification two difficulties are insisted on by its
opponents, which have some practical interest--(1) What is to be done in
those cases for which the code has not provided? and (2) How is new law
to be incorporated with the code? The objection that a code will hamper
the opinions of the court, destroy the flexibility and elasticity of the
common law, &c., disappears when it is stated in the form of a
proposition, that law codified will cover a smaller number of cases, or
will be less easily adapted to new cases, than law uncodified. The
French system ordered the judges, under a penalty, to give a decision on
all cases, whether contemplated or not by the code, and referred them
generally to the following sources:--(1) Equite naturelle, loi
naturelle; (2) loi romain; (3) loi coutumier; (4) usages, exemples,
jugements, jurisprudence; (5) droit commun; (6) principes generaux,
maximes, doctrine, science. The Prussian code, on the other hand,
required the judges to report new cases to the head of the judicial
department, and they were decided by the legislative commission. No
provision was made in either case for incorporating the new law with the
code, an omission which Austin justly considers fatal to the usefulness
of codification. It is absurd to suppose that any code can remain long
without requiring substantial alteration. Cases will arise when its
meaning must be extended and modified by judges, and every year will
produce its quota of new legislation by the state. The courts should be
left to interpret a code as they now interpret statutes, and provision
should be made for the continual revision of the code, so that the new
law created by judges or directly by the state may from time to time be
worked into the code.