« ПретходнаНастави »
assist any Japanese legal proceeding to take evidence by commission in the United States, although the Japanese Law counts upon such a method as above reported. I need scarcely add that any American document to be used in a Japanese Court must be always vised by one of the Japanese consuls stationed in this country.
The present essay is not intended to give a minute description and discussion of the Japanese Law bearing upon the status of foreigners, but I would be pleased if it be thought I have been more or less successful in presenting to this learned association an epitome of the law in a general way for the purpose of references.
Albert Hessberg, of Albany:
Mr. President, I have been requested to present the report of the Executive Committee.
Mr. Hessberg read the report of the Committee as follows:
ALBANY, N. Y., January 20, 1903.
To the New York State Bar Association:
The Executive Committee submits the following report:
First. The annual joint meeting of the Executive and Law Reform Committees was held at the city of Albany on the first Friday of December, 1902, to prescribe topics for consideration at the annual meeting of the Association for 1903.
Second. At the annual meeting of the Executive Committee held at the Capitol, in the city of Albany, on the 19th day of January, 1903, there were present: Judge Keck, Chairman, also Messrs. Ingalsbe, Rudd, Danforth, Philip and Buchanan.
Third. The following business was transacted at such meeting:
Mr. Albert Hessberg presented his report as Treasurer of the Association.
On motion, Messrs. Ingalsbe and Danforth were appointed to examine said report and the vouchers and papers appertaining thereto, and subsequently reported that they found the same, respectively, to be correct, and the report was received and placed on file.
On motion, one hundred and thirty-six new members of the Association were elected.
On motion, the following named bills were ordered to be paid:
Edward Kaestner, for services connected with
the annual meeting.
F. E. Wadhams, for disbursements relative to
the annual meeting.
On motion, the sum of $150 was appropriated to pay the clerk of the Treasurer of the Association for the following year.
It was also resolved that the Treasurer be, and he hereby is, authorized and directed to pay the expenses of this annual meeting, and for the publishing and distributing of the annual report, upon the same being audited by the Secretary of the Executive Committee or, in his absence, by any member of said Committee of the Third Judicial Department.
The Treasurer was, also, on motion, directed to pay any other bills and accounts presented to this Association upon the same being duly audited by the Secretary of the
Executive Committee or, in his absence, by any member of said Committee of the Third Judicial Department.
On motion, the Committee adjourned.
Mr. President, I offer the following names for membership: William H. Harris, of New York; Ledyard P. Hale, of Canton; Francis Burton Harrison, of New York; James O. Farrel, of New York; Isaac R. Breen, of Watertown; Robert N. Kenyon, of New York; J. Addison Young, of New Rochelle; Townsend Scudder, of New York.
J. Newton Fiero, of Albany:
. Will you allow me, before further business is taken up, to move that the report of the Committee on Law Reform be made a special order at the opening session this afternoon. I ask the indulgence of the Association for the reason that the Committee desire to report what progress has been made by the Committee of Fifteen appointed by the Governor to examine into the condition of the statutes. That report had not, up to this morning, been presented to the Legislature and we did not feel at liberty to present it to the Association or take any action. It goes in this morning and it will then be a matter that can be presented to the Association, and I therefore move it be made a special order at the opening this afternoon.
The motion was duly seconded and carried.
A motion is in order that the Secretary cast a ballot for the election of the gentlemen whose names were submitted to you just now.
Abner Robertson, of Salem:
I wish to propose the name of George B. McCartee, Jr., of Salem.
Mr. McCartee's name will be included.
James M. Hunt, of New York:
I propose the name of Timothy Davenport, of New York, and Ira H. Brainerd, of New York, the son of one of our Vice-Presidents.
I propose the names of Philip A. Brennan, of Brooklyn; Charles C. Paulding, of New York, and R. W. Carr, of Albany.
Henry L. Bogert, of New York:
I move those names be referred to the Committee with instructions to report at the earliest opportunity.
The motion was duly seconded and carried.
We will now listen to a paper on "The Supreme Court Dilemma," by Mr. Simon Fleischmann, of Buffalo.
Simon Fleischmann, of Buffalo:
MR. PRESIDENT AND FELLOW-MEMBERS OF THE BAR ASSOCIATION. If I had the very great honor of an intimate acquaintance with the eloquent speaker who addressed you this morning, Mr. Littleton, which I hope to
have later, I could not resist in indulging in a pleasantry to the effect, that he must have found a part of my paper since I have been down in Albany. I say a part of it because my paper is much more exhaustive than his. (Laughter.) I would be in honor, however, compelled to admit that, if he found it all, he condensed, improved and vitalized it, and my only excuse under the circumstances for presenting the remainder of my paper which he did not appropriate (laughter) is that it may be considered in the nature of a free discussion of the very important subject which he introduced here to-day, so far as I am concerned, in better form than if I should merely arise and indulge in a rambling talk. This appears to be a field day for the Bar and I will now go to the bat. (Laughter.) Probably you will want me to make a home run long before I get through. This paper is entitled, for want of a better name, "The Supreme Court Dilemma."
THE SUPREME COURT DILEMMA.
It has become proverbial that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. It is equally true that the test of a law, whether constitutional or legislative, is in its actual operation. The Constitution of the United States, though the admiration of the world, has required amendment from time to time to meet the actual wants of a progressive government, and the like has been the fate of State Constitutions. So thoroughly, indeed, are the limitations even of constitutional law appreciated in this State, that the present Constitution provides that the question of its entire revision shall be submitted periodically to the whole people.
The Constitution under which the people of the State are now prospering, though, in some respects, laboring,