« ZurückWeiter »
J. H. Allen,
W. H. Snell, of Tacoma.
The President called for a report from the Treasurer relative to obtaining the funds in the hands of the former treasurer, under the instruction of this Association given at the meeting held in Olympia on January 8th, 1894.
The Treasurer, James B. Howe, reported that he had written to the former Treasurer, J. W. Robinson, demanding the money in his hands belonging to the Association, but as yet had received no answer.
On motion, the Treasurer was instructed to make further demand upon the ex-Treasurer for said funds, and if the said ex-Treasurer fails to respond in a reasonable time to enforce its collection.
On motion of Mr. Humphries, a Committee of three was appointed, consisting of Messrs. J. E. Humphries, F. T. Post and J. H. Allen, to investigate the case and report in the afternoon. The President declared a recess till 1:30 p. m.
July 18th, 1894, 1:30 p. m. Association called to order, Vice-President Forster in the chair. The Committee appointed to investigate the matter pertaining to the ex-Treasurer, submitted the following:
SEATTLE, Wash., July 19th, 1894. J. W. ROBINSON, Esq.
DEAR SIR: We beg to inform you that the Bar Assiciation of the State of Washington, to-day, passed resolutions directing the Treasurer of said Association, to proceed by law against you to collect the balance in your hands as ex-Treasurer of said Association, appointed the undersigned, a committee to investigate the facts of this case and report to them at as early a day as practicable, whether any steps should be taken looking towards expelling you from said Asssciation, and what further steps, if any, said Association should take against you in their behalf. We find upon investigation, that on the 6th day of June, 1888, you received from N. S. Porter, Secretary, $145.00 and on January 14th, 1889, you received from said Secretary, $25.00, for these amounts the said Secretary has your receipts. That you have neither paid nor handed over to your successors in office, any portion of said amounts. That there now remains due by you to the said Association, the sum of $170.00, with interest thereon from the dates aforesaid. That you have promised for four years to hand this amount, within a few days, to your successors;
have failed to do so. Under instructions of the resolution of said Association, J. B. Howe, Esq., the present Treasurer thereof, made a written demand upon you to turn over to him said money, which demand was mailed to you at your address in Olympia; that said demand has been ignored, no reply thereto having been made by you. Therefore, we hereby call upon you to show cause on or before the first day of September, 1894, if any you have, why this Committee should not report recommending that you be expelled from said Association on account of your default in this behalf.
JOHN E. HUMPHRIES,
Committee. Mr. Fishback moved, that the report of the Committee be turned over to the Treasurer, who is hereby instructed to write to the former Treasurer upon the matter contained in the report, that the answer, if any be received, may advise the Committee how to act in the premises. Motion carried.
Judge R. A. Ballinger then read before the Association. his paper on the subject of “Community Property Laws of the State of Washington. (See Appendix "A.") At the conclusion of which, the subject matter of said paper was discussed by Messrs. R. S. Greene, Orange Jacobs, E. S. Blaine and others.
Mr. E. C. Hughes moved that a committee of three, of which Judge Ballinger should be chairman, be appointed by the President, to draft a Community Property Law, giving effect as far as practicable to the valuable suggestions contained in the paper and in accordance with the decisions of the State Supreme Court upon the subject. Motion carried, and the President appointed as such Committee. Messrs. R. A. Ballinger, of Port Townsend; E. C. Hughes, of Seattle, and Charles S. Fogg, of Tacoma.
President Arthur having arrived and taken the chair, by request, he read his address on the subject of “ Lawyers in their relations with the State.” (See Appendix "B.")
This address was well received by the Association, as was evidenced by frequent bursts of applause.
Mr. G. A. C. Rochester moved to reconsider the vote by which Mr. Hughes' motion to appoint a committee of three to draft a bill for a law relating to Community Property was carried.
This motion was opposed by a good number, but after quite a lengthy debate, the motion was carried.
The question recurring on the original motion. Mr. Jones offered an amendment to the effect, that, when the bill shall have been prepared by the committee, it shall be printed and a copy thereof sent to each member of the Association, who shall send the same to the Secretary with his approval or disapproval written thereon. Mr. Hughes, with the consent of the second, accepted the amendment as a part of the original motion.
Quite a lengthy discussion upon the motion in its present form followed. Judge James T. Moore, of Spokane, moved as a substitute for Mr. Hughes' motion, that the Committee be instructed to draft such a bill as was contemplated in Mr. Hughes' motion and report the same to this Association at its next annual meeting.
After some argument in which it was urged that inasmuch as we have endured the present Community Property Law for thirteen years, we could tolerate it for two years more; the motion was carried. On motion, the Association adjourned until 10 o'clock a. m. to-morrow.
N. S. PORTER,
Second Day's Proceedings.
ROOMS OF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
SEATTLE, Wash., July 19th, 1894.) Association met pursuant to adjournment; President Arthur in the chair.
After the transaction of routine business, Hon. Frank H. Graves, of Spokane, read before the Association his paper on the subject of “Non-Partisan Selection of the Judiciary.” (See Appendix “C.")
The subject of the paper being open for discussion, Mr. McGilvra, of Seattle, opened the argument. He said, substantially:
“It has been my opinion for many years that partisanism not only has no proper place in the matter of the selection of the judiciary, but that the effect of partisan selection must,of necessity, be injurious.
“As yet the judiciary in this country, both state and federal, is comparatively pure.
“The judiciary is one branch of our government against which the charge of venality has never been made, and as a whole it stands on an eminence above suspicion in this regard.
“In view of the well known and acknowledged venality in its worst form, of the legislative departments of both state and nation, the general purity of our judiciary constitutes a bow of promise and is a beacon light to guide the