« ForrigeFortsett »
It is not in order; the report not having been printed cannot be the subject of debate.
Henry Wade Rogers, of Connecticut:
The resolution which I understand Judge Parker wishes to offer is not endorsing any request which the committee makes; I respectfully submit that it is in order.
While the ruling stands, yet if there is no objection the resolution may be read. The Chair hearing no objection, Judge Parker may read the resolution.
Alton B. Parker, of New York:
It is not at all necessary. It is a matter of no consequence to me, but I thought it was simply courteous to the committee. The resolution reads:
"Resolved, That the American Bar Association approve the action of the Committee on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar in inviting the Carnegie Foundation to make an investigaton into the subject of legal education and admissions to the Bar, and it is gratified to learn that the invitation has been accepted, and the investigation is now under way.”
The Chair must rule that the resolution does refer to the report of the committee in that it approves the report; therefore, it is manifestly out of order. The Chair so rules.
Nathaniel W. Ladd, of Massachusetts:
Do I understand the Chair to rule that no other business except that laid down on the program is germane at this time?
We are in the order of receiving reports of committees. It is a fixed rule that reports of committees in order to be considered at a regular meeting of the Association must be printed in advance of the meeting. The reason is that members may know in advance what they are to be called upon to approve or disapprove.
Nathaniel W. Ladd, of Massachusetts:
I entirely agree with the Chair, but I hope the resolution may be considered at the proper time,
Selden P. Spencer, of Missouri:
I desire to offer the following resolution:
"Resolved, That the American Bar Association expresses its gratitude to the Carnegie Foundation for its contemplated investigation into the subject of legal education and admissions to the Bar."
This resolution does not refer to the report of the committee, and I think it is, therefore, in order.
The Chair rules that it is not in order. It is an evasion of the point.
The report of the Committee on Commercial Law.
Francis B. James, of Ohio:
Your Committee on Commercial Law has filed a printed report, first, upon Bills of Lading, second, upon Bankruptcy.
The report as to Bills of Lading recommends the passage of what is known as the Pomerene bill now pending in the United States Senate. A year ago your committee favorably reported on the Pomerene bill which had just passed the United States Senate. The new bill differs in no material respect from the bill endorsed by this Association a year ago, with the exception that the Pomerene bill then endorsed contained a provision for a rigid form of bill of lading. At the suggestion of the Interstate Commerce Commission, sections 2 and 3, making the form rigid, were eliminated, so that the form will be remitted to the Interstate Commerce Commission under the Act of June 18th, 1910, to prescribe a reasonable form of a bill of lading if the carriers do not do so. Now, our report is practically a repetition of the report last year as to the Pomerene bill.
In respect of bankruptcy, the Association has repeatedly endorsed the policy of a National Bankrupt Act. In every meeting of Congress, bills have been introduced for a repeal of
the statute. In the first session of the 63d Congress three bills were introduced for this purpose, and the committee recommends the adoption of a resolution expressing continued confidence in a National Bankrupt Act, and that these three bills should be defeated.
There are also four bills pending for the amendment of the Bankrupt Act. The committee has given some thought to the amendments, and has recommended further time for their consideration. It was thought that to consider them now and to attempt amendment might jeopardize the act itself. I move that the recommendations of the committee be concurred in.
The motion was seconded.
W. O. Hart, of Louisiana:
I ask that the questions be separated.
The question is on the report of the committee recommending approval of the Pomerene Bills of Lading Act. Is there any discussion?
Walter George Smith, of Pennsylvania:
The Pomerene bill is essentially the Bills of Lading Act approved by the Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, already approved by this Association.
The report was then adopted as to the first recommendation of the committee.
The question recurring upon the recommendation of the committee with respect to the repeal of the bankrupt law, the report was approved both as to continuance of the statute and against the suggested amendments.
Next in order is the request of the committee for further time as to the pending amendments to the Bankrupt Act. It will be granted, as matter of course, unless there is objection. The Chair hearing no objection, it is so ordered.
(See Report in Appendix, page 477.)
The Committee on International Law.
Charles Noble Gregory, of the District of Columbia:
The committee has filed its report epitomizing the various international negotiations, treaties and adjustments effected by our country within the year. The report refers to matters of discussion pending at the present time with various friendly nations. The committee expresses the earnest belief and hope that these can and will all be adjusted by the United States in accordance with principles of justice and in strict accord with the requirements of international law. And further, that wherever an obligation incurred under a treaty is under discussion, that obligation must be met by both an interpretation and administration of the treaty in a spirit of the highest good faith, a duty imposed by the declarations of our highest tribunal.
No action being called for by the report, it will be received and filed as requested.
(See Report in Appendix, page 506.)
The report of the Committee on Grievances was called for, but none was presented.
The Committee on Law Reporting and Digesting.
Edward Q. Keasbey, of New Jersey:
The committee has no report to make. No matter has been referred to it, and the committee has not thought it necessary to add anything to what was stated last year. It will, however, be glad to receive any suggestion from the Association.
The report made on behalf of the committee will be received. Is there any report from the Committee on Insurance Law?
Rodney A. Mercur, of Pennsylvania:
Owing to the lamented death of Ralph W. Breckenridge, the Chairman, I am called upon to present the annual report of the committee.
The members will observe that the committee has not made remarkable progress, but the subject is a large one and all large bodies move slowly. The committee has assurances from the Senate Committee that they will give us all the assistance ir their power, even to the extent of drafting a proposed bill, which, after it has been approved by the proper committees, will be presented to this Association for action.
The only recommendation made is that the committee be authorized to co-operate with the Senate and House Committees on the District of Columbia in the preparation of a model insurance code for the District, with a view to its ultimate adoption by the several states after its presentation to and approval by this Association.
I make that motion.
The motion being seconded, was adopted.
(See Report in Appendix, page 525.)
The Committee on Patent, Trade-Mark and Copyright Law.
Frederick P. Fish, of Massachusetts:
In the absence of Judge Taylor, the Chairman, I present the report of the committee. It is printed and is on the table. It simply reiterates the belief that there should be a Court of Patent Appeals, a proposition behind which this Association has stood for many years. The committee asks to have the report adopted, as again expressing the views of the Association that such court should be established.
The report was then approved and its recommendations adopted.
(See Report in Appendix, page 515.)
The Committee on Taxation.
Albert W. Biggs, of Tennessee:
The committee has been inactive for several years. Judge Brown, the Chairman appointed by President Kellogg, declined the position; it thereupon devolved upon me.