« ZurückWeiter »
K. R. Babbitt:
That is just the point I had in mind—can this litigation result in anything effective and practical?
Well, I might add, by way of information, that counsel for Colorado have been endeavoring to force this question to an issue that is, I mean a legal issue—in order to take testimony if necessary, and that in pursuance of that the Attorney General and I went to Washington, about the time the Supreme Court was closing, that is, on the first of June, to meet the Attorney General of Kansas and his associate counsel, and that we were then advised that they were not prepared to file a reply as we hoped they wouid do, but that they wanted leave to file an amended bill, and this amended bill is intended to make individual appropriators parties defendant, so that they may get something substantial if they get a decree, because they realized that if the case were continued as it stood they would get no effective decree.
F. E. Gregg :
It might also be said in answer to Mr. Babbitt that there is another part of the prayer of Kansas which I think Mr. Rogers overlooked—that part of the relief demanded was that the State of Colorado should not renew the corporate lives of any of these companies which are taking water. Isn't that true, Mr. Rogers?
May I ask a further question? If the State of Colorado should become an appropriator by carrying out some legislation respecting reservoirs and large ditches, would that in any way affect this pending case?
Well, the pending case could then be maintained for the purpose of having that legal question determined; but if the State of Colorado denied that it was an appropriator and could make that denial good, the case could no longer remain in the Supreme Court as a controversy between States. The only effect of the diversion of water by the State of Colorado would be to give this jurisdictional element. It would not change the legal question presented and which may be presented by their bringing in individual appropriators as defendants, because they will occupy the same position as the State would occupy.
I notice in the order of business for to-morrow the election of officers, and it being customary on the first day of the convention to appoint a committee to suggest names on the second day, when the election is held, I therefore move that a committee of five be ap pointed by the President to suggest names to the Association tomorrow for officers for the ensuing year.
The motion was seconded by Ralph Talbot and carried.
The Chair will take the liberty of appointing this committee a little later and will notify the members appointed.
On motion of Caldwell Yeaman, the Association was thereupon adjourned to 8 p. m.
Music Room, THE ANTLERS,
July 1, 1903. The Association was called to order at 8:15 p. m. in the music room of the Antlers Hotel by President Lunt.
I wish to announce the committee that was to be appointed for the nomination of officers for the ensuing year. The committee will be composed of Judge Yeaman, Judge Rogers, Judge Northcutt, Mr. Ilarry N. Haynes and Mr. McAllister, and will meet in this room immediately after the address.
Men of the West will not admit that it is flattery to say that they do not and will not look backward, except to learn wherein they may better all forward movements. The pioneers of this great Western Empire always looked eagerly toward the future. There was no backward for them; they struggled forward, through bitter adverse environment, and the West, with its possibilities, has ever been an exaltation. New ideas, new conditions, new fortunes and new happiness were the results of their Western movement and their noble struggle. It is strange, therefore, that the people of the West are not alarmed or dazed at the great propositions which are constantly presented to them? The serious and solemn questions that are tendered by changing fortunes and conditions are manfully met, and a strenuous effort has always been made by this people to solve such problems successfully, as well for the prosperity of themselves as for the nation. Men of the West have not approached these questions with fear and trembling, except as they earnestly realize their vast import for the advancement and happiness of a united people. Sometimes their hearts do fail when they note the wavering in the line which should stand for defense and security; sometimes they mourn that those who once valiently
fought for all that was best and noble for the nation, seem, as age creeps over them, to have their vision clouded as to what is best for all. Looking forward the men of the West have stood bravely for what betters local government and what advances, enriches and ennobles national autonomy; enriches it in its power for good, ennobles it in the spread of its beneficent doctrines. No cry of the has ever, in Western soil, found root enough for robust vitality. throng which detracts from the rational power of the Government The West has always looked forward with hope, backward only to encourage those who are lagging behind the standard.
One of these men of the West who has been active in all things that tend for the good of his State and of the country, who has borne his part in the struggle, and who now, from the Bench can calmly review the past and consider the future, to-day honors us with his presence, -I have the pleasure and honor of introducing to you the Honorable Smith McPherson of Iowa.
Judge Smith McPherson of Red Oak, Iowa, then delivered the annual address on the subject, “Forward and Not Backward.”
(For the address see the appendix.)
Thereupon the meeting was adjourned until 10 o'clock a. m. of to-morrow in the Sun Parlor of the Antlers.
SECOND DAY MEETING.
Sun PARLOR, THE ANTLERS,
Thursday, July 2, 1903, 10:30 a. m. The Association was called to order by President Lunt. The President:
The first matter requiring our attention is the report of the Committee on Grievances. We will hear from Judge Rogers.
Platt Rogers then presented the report.
The next business is the report of the Committee on Law Reform.
Robert W. Bonynge then read the report.
I wish to say a word to the Association concerning our Legislative Committee that appeared before the last General Assembly. I feel that the results of their work are encouraging to the Bar Association and to the lawyers of this State. There is no question on the proposition that the Constitutional amendment would not have been passed, if it had not been for the earnest assistance of that committee: you should bear in mind, that at the time the committee
, took the matter up the House had already passed a resolution that