Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

We deem it pertinent here to allude to the subject matter of the case of Bingham Hopkins & Co., v. Gross et al., decided by our Supreme Court, and reported in 54 Pac. 1127. We do not intend to criticise the correctness of this decision. It is the law, and it is not our province, even if we might entertain a different opinion, to express it.

The question in this case is whether or not an action at law could be maintained against the survivors of a partnership pending the settlement of the partnership estate to recover a debt due from the firm. The court held the action could not be maintained. At common law the right of action was against the surviving partners, and a joint and several judgment could be had and collected by execution from the partnership property or from the individual property of the members of the firm, and we think this ought to be the law, and our next Legislature should so enact. A very serious question arises here on the running of the statutes of limitation as to the claim against the surviving partners while the partnership is being administered. We find nothing in our statutes suspending the running of the statute of limitations, and unless the courts can work out some equitable principle by which it can be done, it is quite likely to happen that such claims will be barred, as to surviving partners, before the adminstration of the partnership is finally closed.

The Legislature of 1897 passed an act to prohibit any proceeding or action by which a judgment could be continued in force for a longer period than six years from the date of its rendition. Prior to that time the statutes of this state provided an expeditious and inexpensive method for reviving or continuing judgments in force. In the case of Bettman v. Cowley, 19 Wash., 207, the Supreme Court held that the act of 1897 was an impairment of the obligation of contracts and a violation of the federal constitution as against existing judgments.

It is a fair deduction from that decision that the act of 1897 is invalid against any judgment rendered upon a contract entered into during the existence of the statute permitting the renewal and the revival of judgments. No question has been raised against the validity of the law of 1897 as to contracts subsequent to its enactment. We therefore have this anomalous condition that a judgment rendered upon a contract prior to the enactment of the law of 1897 can be renewed and continued in force indefinitely, while a judgment rendered, perhaps, on the same day upon a contract entered into subsequent to the law of 1897 expires by limitation at the expiration of six years and cannot be renewed or revived by any method or proceeding whatever.

It seems to us that this difficulty should be remedied by legislative enactment, since men will hesitate to extend credit under laws which enable a debtor to absolutely avoid the payment of his obligations if he shall succeed in making himself execution proof for a period of six years after the entry of the judgment.

We suggest that the statutes on corporations should be amended so that what are usually termed "private business corporations" should be prohib

ited from doing business until all the capital stock is fully paid up in actual money or property within the state available for the purposes of the business of such corporations; and that banking and insurance corporations 'should be required to pay up the capitol stock in actual cash before beginning business, and the giving of promissory notes therefor should be forbidden; and in order to compel the observance of such a law, the statute should disqualify such corporations from enforcing any contracts entered into, before the observance of this requirement, and punish by fine and imprisonment the officers of the corporation for the violation of it.

Corporations are too often made cloaks for fraud, and while they have become a necessary part of our commercial business, they should be regulated by statute so as to fully protect the public in their dealings with them.

Respectfully submitted,

R. G. HUDSON, Chairman
W. C. SHARPSTEIN,

J. A. SHACKELFORD,
E. M. HAYDEN,

Committee.

The following communication from the chairman of the Committee on Publication was read:

Hon. T. L. Stiles, Tacoma, Wash.:

OLYMPIA, WASH., July 5, 1898.

DEAR JUDGE-I have written a jim dandy report on "Publication," but I fear the Association will not have the pleasure of hearing it read, as it looks now like I will not be able to attend the meeting, and I will not ask anyone else to read it.

It is possible that I may get away to-morrow afternoon, and if I do I will read it the next morning.

With kindest regards, and hoping you will have a good meeting,

I am yours, etc.,
T. N. ALLEN.

[ocr errors]

THE PRESIDENT I believe it is customary, at some stage of the meeting, to discuss these reports. Perhaps the gentlemen prefer to think about it, and a postponement of this subject may be proper, and it may be called up at some future time during the ses

sion.

John Arthur, chairman of Committee on Grievances, asked for further time in which to report, which was granted.

The President announced that the Association would take a recess until afternoon, and that the remaining sessions would be held in the U. S. court room, in the Chamber of Commerce building.

AFTERNOON SESSION.

TACOMA, WASH., July 6, 1899. Association met and was called to order at 2 P. M. by the Presi

dent.

The following named applicants were balloted for and elected to membership in the Association:

P. C. Shine, of Spokane.

John Bronson, L. Frank Brown, Winfield R. Smith, Seattle. Johnson Nickeus, W. H. Harris, T. O. Abbott, S. Warburton, James M. Harris, Bertha M. Snell, Tacoma.

O. V. Linn, Olympia.

H. H. Blackburn, Puyallup.

THE PRESIDENT - Gentlemen of the Association, before we proceed with the business on the program, I wish to call the attention of the Association to a matter which has been brought to my attention by letter. Those of you who remember the proceedings of the State Bar Association will remember that there has been for some time an unfortunate difference between an ex-Judge, Joseph W. Robinson, and this Association. Judge Robinson was formerly the Treasurer of the Association, and left the State in 1893, it seems, while in possession of some of the funds of the Association. At the last annual meeting, it seems as though the information which the Association had was authentic, and that the money had been demanded and was not forthcoming, and such proceedings were had that Judge Robinson's name was dropped from the Association.

I have in my hand a letter from Judge Robinson and a package containing one hundred and seventy dollars in bills, and the letter will possibly explain the situation, and I understand that friends of Judge Robinson are here, ready to give the matter further explanation, and I now lay the matter before the Association for its action. The money which I have here is in original package, and it seems that it was simply lying in a bank vault box, and that the whole matter has perhaps been a misapprehension. Will the Secretary read Judge Robinson's letter?

The Secretary then read the letter, which is as follows:

OLYMPIA, Wash., July 5, 1899. Hon. T. L. Stiles, President State Bar Association, Tacoma, Wash.: SIR-When the State Bar Association of this State was organized at Olympia I was made its treasurer, and, from time to time, received its funds to the amount of $170; but whether I was such officer more than one year, I do not recall. When Judge Brents was elected my successor at Olympia in '91 or '92, he refused to receive the funds, and after his return to Walla Walla, I forwarded him a draft for the amount belonging to the Association, but he returned it to me, saying he would not act, since which time the fact that I had any such fund seems to have passed from my mind. In the fall of '93 I went East, expecting to be gone only a few weeks, but professional employment detained me for nearly five years, but during all this time my law partnership continued at Olympia with the Hon. O. V. Linn, and up to the time of the assumption of his duties as Superior Judge, and it was well known by all my friends and acquaintances that I was away only temporarily, and had no thought of giving up my home in this state. On my return recently it came to my knowledge for the first time that this Association had determined that I had used such funds, but upon what information I am not advised, but I feel confident that no member would intentionally do another such a grave injustice, and for that reason I address you.

I have never used one cent of the Association's money, but, on the contrary, when I received it I always placed it in my private box in the bank here, where it has been all these years, and I now herewith hand you a draft for the amount of $170 (every dollar I ever received), and which was purchased with the same money I received.

I confess to carelessness in this matter, but the fact is that a letter or telegram to myself or law partner would have secured this fund promptly and saved me much humiliation. Without egotism, I think I may say that I organized the Association in the Territory, and I know I paid its first bills and was happy in the opportunity to do so, and no one could possibly regret more than I do this unfortunate affair, and I am anxious to do whatever is still necessary, if any thing there be, to satisfy you of my entire good faith, and with my best wishes and with very great respect, I remain, Yours very truly,

J. W. ROBINSON,

THE PRESIDENT· Judge Robinson seems to have changed his mind about the draft and has forwarded the money. What is your pleasure, gentlemen, in regard to the communication?

Mr. C. S. Fogg introduced the following preamble and resolution, which were, on motion, adopted:

WHEREAS, It appears that certain money of this Association in the custody of J. W. Robinson as Treasurer, has been at all times in the bank vault at Olympia, but on account of the prolonged absence in the East of

Judge Robinson the amount has not heretofore been placed in the hands of his successor in office; the money now having been paid over to the Association and the delay explained; therefore, be it

Resolved, That the resolution adopted at the annual meeting of this Association at Spokane in July, 1898, striking the name of J. W. Robinson from the roll of the Association be and the same is hereby rescinded and Judge Robinson be reinstated upon payment of his dues.

Jas. G. McClinton, then read before the association his paper on the subject, "Reform in Criminal Procedure." (See Appendix.) Byron Millett then read before the Association his paper on the subject, The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Association adjourned.

« ZurückWeiter »