« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
L. C. Gilman :
Resolved, That this Association favors the enactment of legislation by Congress providing for the reduction of the cost of appeals in the federal courts in the following particulars :
“1. By providing for printing the record under the supervision of the clerk of the trial court and the certifying of such printed records as the record on appeal, thus doing away with the expense of transcript of the record now required.
“ 2. By providing for the printing of such number of copies of such record, and for the certification thereof without additional cost in case of appeal to, or certiorari from the Supreme Court as to avoid any second printing of the record.”
Under the rule this resolution will be referred to the Committee to Suggest Remedies and Formulate Proposed Laws to Prevent Delay and Unnecessary Cost in Litigation.
At the request of the President, Simeon E. Baldwin, of Connecticut, took the Chair.
Jacob M. Dickinson, of Illinois :
I have no doubt that many members of the Association present here are aware that Mr. Fabius H. Busbee, of North Carolina, who has always been a loyal member of this Association, constant in his attendance, and zealous in promoting the objects of the Association, is ill in this city. He came to Seattle to attend this meeting, but was taken quite seriously ill, and is now confined in a hospital. I called at the hospital this morning to see him, and I am glad to report that while his condition is still serious, the physicians do not apprehend any fatal result. With these remarks, I offer the following resolution:
WHEREAS, The American Bar Association in annual meeting assembled at Seattle, Washington, has learned with sincere regret that our brother, the Honorable Fabius H. Busbee, of North Carolina, who came to Seattle to attend this meeting, is confined by sickness in a hospital in this city,
Resolved, That we extend to him our deepest sympathy and the assurance of our earnest hope for his speedy and good recovery to health, and
Resolved, That the Secretary of the Association be instructed to transmit to Mr. Busbee a copy of this resolution.
The resolution was seconded by various members and was adopted by a rising vote.
The President then resumed the Chair.
Mr. President, I desire to present the report of the Committee on Insurance Law, which was passed until this morning. I regret exceedingly the absence of our able Chairman, Mr. Breckenridge. I assume the members of the Association have read this report, as it was printed and distributed some time ago. have not recommended anything that is new. Our recommendations are only two in number. They are the 5th and 6th recommendations of the report of 1907.
For the purpose of getting the recommendations before the meeting, I move the adoption of the first recommendation, which reads as follows:
“ The enactment in each state of a law making it a misdemeanor for any person to maintain or conduct an office, or solicit insurance, or eceive money for and on behalf of any person, association, co-partnership or corporation, conducting any kind of insurance business in the United States, who are not licensed to transact such business by the states in which such persons, associations, co-partnerships or corporations conduct their business, or any part of it."
Charles J. Schnabel, of Oregon:
I second the motion that the recommendation of the committee be adopted.
Samuel C. Eastman, of New Hampshire:
I have no desire to oppose the adoption of this recommendation, but I am perfectly sure that the law proposed will not be adopted in many states, because like the State of Massachusetts, and also like the State of New York, and some other states, perhaps, the laws now provide for the placing of excess lines of insurance in companies that are not admitted to do business in the state; and that is necessary for the protection of the insured in many cases. The law that is proposed would require a great deal of legislation to be enacted, or some, at least. The evil is certainly one that should be guarded against, but I do not believe the remedy proposed will be effective. While I think the law will not be adopted for the reason stated, I shall make no further opposition to the recommendation made by the committee.
The recommendation was adopted.
I now move the adoption of the second recommendation of the committee reading as follows:
“The enactment of a law requiring the apportionment and contingent distribution of the deferred dividend surplus of all life policies hereafter issued.”
Robert S. Taylor, of Indiana :
I dislike to magnify the office of the Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, of which I happen to be a member, but that Conference exists, as the Association knows, and is doing excellent work in the matter of formulating laws. The formation of laws suited to the condition of the various states, to which the laws are recommended, is a matter that requires extreme care, and such statutes should be drawn only by experts and then submitted to careful consideration.
This matter of insurance legislation is a subject of great difficulty, about which there is considerable controversy. The Conference of Insurance Commissioners and others, which met two or three years ago, for the purpose of recommending legislation on the subject, was a total failure, because it did not have the laws which it recommended carefully drawn and considered by experts.
In the situation in which I am, being a member of the Conference on Uniform Laws, I do not make any motion, but simply suggest, if it meets the approval of the Association, that the Conference on Uniform Laws be requested to draw statutes for the purpose of carrying out these recommendations of the Insurance Committee, otherwise you may have as a result of a resolution of this sort-if you have any result at all—some rather wild legislation.
Amasa M. Eaton, of Rhode Island:
The same consideration that deterred my brother Russell from voting upon the passage of the last recommendation was operative with me also. Now I would suggest, in addition to what Mr. Russell has said, that it would be well for this Association to adopt this recommendation of the committee, as it did the first, and then to refer both recommendations to the Conference of Commissioners on Uniform Laws.
Rodney A. Mercur:
It seems to me that we are inclined to postpone from year to year action upon the important matters, although they may have been committed as this subject was to a committee of the Association. Why is it necessary to wait until each member can be perfectly assured that the action of the committee is strictly in accordance with the demands of the situation ? So far as my information goes, the subject matter embodied in the report of this committee is one calling for immediate and prompt attention.
If the gentleman will permit the Chair to interrupt him, the motion before the house is to adopt the recommendation of the committee.
The recommendation was adopted.
I now move that the two proposed acts submitted by the committee and known as Appendix A and Appendix B be referred to the Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws.
The motion was seconded and adopted.
Is there any report from the Committee on Classification of the Law ?
Is there any report from the Committee on Indian Legislation ?
That committee has no business before it. It had some business before it, but it disposed of it some two years ago.
Edmund F. Trabue, of Kentucky, presented the report of the committee.
(See the Report in the Appendix.) The report of the committee will be received. The resolution referred to will, under the rule, be referred to the committee.
The Secretary: Mr. President, this being a special committee, it goes out of existence with this meeting, unless continued.
Rodney A. Mercur:
Is not this a good time to determine our permanent policy in the matter of special committees?
I am one of the few members who have been been with the Association from the beginning, and, if I may be excused for the personal allusion, I drew the Constitution of the Association at a summer hotel in the Adirondacks in 1878 and it has not been changed very much since. The Constitution and By-laws originally provided for certain standing committees. It was the intention of those who formed the Association that those standing committees should prepare the business of the Association and it was intended to have committees enough to answer all the proper purposes of the Association. One of those committees is that on Judicial Administration and Remedial Procedure. It is to be presumed that that committee will always be carefully selected from among our best men. It has always been a strong committee.
The first thought of such a committee must naturally be judicial administration and procedure in the federal courts which are common to the whole country and in which every man has an equal interest. Now, is it worth while to perpetuate a special committee to do work which belongs in the field of a standing committee ?
A special committee requires for its efficiency that it shall meet