Page images
PDF
EPUB

1875 1877

62

120

following suggestions applicable only to the circumstances or conditions therein suggested :

In every case where the plaintiff is compelled to bring suit in the county of the domicile of a corporation in order to get service upon it he should be allowed to take a change of venue upon the filing of his petition setting forth in addition to this fact any of the well known grounds for change of venue, and upon this petition being verified by the plaintiff and supported by the affidavit of two reputable citizens, the petition should be granted as a matter of right.

Respectfully submitted,

JOHN FLETCHER,
THOMAS C. McRae,

J. H. CARMICHAEL.
SPECIAL ACTS FROM 1875-1907
Total
No. No. of Per Cent

Ratio Increase Year

| No. Special General Special Special to over prev.
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts

General Acts Year
100
II
89 I1.00

I to 8
79 17

21.52
I to 3.5

6 1879 85 23 62 27.05 I to 2.7

6 1881 104 32 72 30.77

I to 2.25 1883 149 29

19.47 I to 4.14 1885 143 29 114 20.28

I to 3.93 *1887

160
45
115 28.13 I to 2.56

16 1889 123 35

28.46

I to 2.51 1891 169 52

118

I to 2.31

16 1893 194 52

144 26.80 I to 2.77 1895 160 41 119 25.62 I to 2.91

II 1897

17
29

I to 1.71

24 †1897

50
15

35 30.00 3 to 7 1899 205

62
143 30.25

I to 2.31

47 1901

84
139
37.67
I to 1.05

22 1903 217 119

I to 1.2

14 [1905 364

231
133 63.46

1.74 to I

133 1907 474 166 62.87 1.86 to 1

77 *November Term, 1886, Davies v. Gaines, 48 Ark. decided. $Extra Session. [Note the change in ratio of Special to general acts.

Up to 1891 most of special acts were those prohibiting sale of liquor near churches, schools, colleges, etc.

Of last two sessions almost one-half the special acts were those requiring railroads to build depots, stop trains, etc.

Messrs. H. B. McKenzie, W. L. Terry, J. W. Crawford, Geo. B. Rose, J. H. Carmichael and John Fletcher discussed the report.

88

IO

30.18

I

56

30.36

2

223

45.16

308

The report was filed, but no action was taken upon it.

The Committee on Judiciary made no report.

Judge Carter was unable to be present and mailed his report but the Secretary did not receive it until after the meeting adjourned. It is as follows:

To the President and Members of the Association:

Each Circuit Judge supervises in a material may the expenditure of not less than $20,000.00 a year, in the execution of the criminal law, which is paid by the respective counties of the circuit; and I think not less than $10,000.00 a year on the civil docket, paid by litigants, as costs. There being seventeen Circuits in the State, and two judges in yours, the expenses of all the courts is more than $500,000.00 per year. So you see there is a “Business side” to the office, and I think its importance is often overlooked.

I do not think the habit of frittering away time in the court room in the preparation of cases, work that should have been done before court convened, and unreasonably short sessions (late coming and early adjourning hours) is either justifiable or promotive of justice. While I do not believe in undue haste in these matters, yet their importance to litigants and tax payers in the matter of expense should not be forgotten, nor minimized. This can be brought about in several ways, and among which is a requirement on the part of the judge that parties litigant shall be in the court room ready to announce when the case is called; and that jurors and witnesses shall be in the court room also. Much time is lost, after the case is called in hunting up parties, jurors and witnesses. There are many other ways in which time can be economized in the court room and expenses lessened.

J. M. CARTER,

Chairman.

Mr. John M. Moore moved that that part of Article 8 of the Constitution be repealed, which provides that no legislation shall be recommended except upon report of a committee, which report must have been mailed to members fifteen days before the meeting.

After considerable discussion by Messrs. John M. Moore, John Fletcher, T. C. McRae, W. L. Terry, Ashley Cockrill, D. Hopson, J. F. Loughborough, J. H. Carmichael and W. F. Coleman, the motion was carried.

Upon motion of Judge Jacob Trieber, the Secretary was directed to send a telegram to the Tennessee Association, which was in session, expressing our best wishes for a successful meeting

(The message was sent.--Secretary.)

Report of Committee on Uniform State Laws was read by Mr. Geo. B. Rose, as follows:

To the President of the Arkansas State Bar Association:

Your Committee on Uniform State Laws respectfully report that the American Bar Association has prepared an admirable codification of the law of negotiable instruments which should be adopted by every State in the Union, and which has already been adopted in thirty States and territories and in the District of Columbia. Repeated efforts have been made to secure its adoption by our legislature, but all have resulted in failure. No one opposes the act, but the necessity of reading it at large in both houses three times has precluded its passage, as it has been found impossible to get the legislature to give the time necessary. The effort, however, should be renewed at each session of the legislature until our labors are crowned with success. As so large a portion of negotiable instruments are executed in one State and payable in another, it is of extreme importance that we have a uniform rule, so that parties taking them anywhere may understand their rights. The American Bar Association has also prepared an admirable bill for a uniform law as to bills of lading and warehouse receipts, which should be passed in this State.

The American Bar Association is also making a strong effort to get through a uniform divorce law. Its terms are very closely analogous to those already maintaining in this State, and we do not deem its passage a matter of urgent importance, but it could do no harm.

Respectfully,

G. B. Rose,
W. V. TOMPKINS,
C. B. MOORE,

John T. SIFFORD.
The report was adopted.

Mr. John M. Moore moved that the committee making the report be appointed to bring to the attention of the Legislature Ce üniform Negotiable Instruments Bill.

Mr. Geo. B. Rose moved to amend the motion so as to require the President to appoint a special committee of five.

The amended motion was adopted.

Upon motion of Mr. John Fletcher, the matters of uniform bills of lading and warehouse receipts were also referred to same committee.

The President appointed the following members to compose this committee: Messrs. Geo. B. Rose, Seth Reynolds, George Vaughan, H. B. McKenzie and D. K. Hawthorne.

The meeting adjourned until 9:30 the next morning.

MORNING SESSION-FRIDAY.

The President called the meeting to order and introduced Mr. W. A. Falconer, of Fort Smith, who read a paper on “Our Liquor Licensing System.” (See Appendix, p. 137.)

Senator James P. Clark discussed this paper.

The Secretary reported that the following had applied for membership in the Association :

NEW MEMBERS.
E. M. CARL LEE, Augusta
WILL AKERS, Little Rock
J. O. HILLIS, Little Rock
J. H. HARROD, Little Rock
CHAS. JACOBSON, Little Rock
R. W. ROBINS, Conway
SAM M. TAYLOR, Pine Bluff
H. P. WARNER, Fort Smith
G. W. HAYS, Camden
A. D. DULANEY, Ashdown
DOUGLAS HEARD, Little Rock
FRANK N. HENDERSON, Argenta
J. H. HAWTHORNE, Jonesboro
R. J. LEA, Little Rock
G. D. HENDERSON, Little Rock
DANIEL TAYLOR, Pine Bluff
R. H. DUDLEY, Piggott
JAS. H. JOHNSON, Atkins
SETH C. REYNOLDS, Ashdown
J. E. CLERGET, Morrilton
M. E. DUNAWAY, Little Rock
ALLEN H. HAMITER, Lewisville
CUMMINS RATCLIFFE, Little Rock
T. B. NORFLEET, Argenta
G. A. MCCONNELL, Little Rock
H. C. HALE, Little Rock
Upon motion, they were duly elected members.

Mr. John M. Moore stated that the Secretary in his report refers to the fact that a fund is being collected for the purpose of erecting a monument over the grave of Senator Garland, and hc makes no recommendation but brings it to the attention of

« PreviousContinue »