« ZurückWeiter »
better adapted to the practice in this state. They have special courses on irrigation and mining law, and as these subjects are of special interest here, that may account for the actual superiority. But there is one thing which is absolutely indisputable, and that is that the men who are trained here are quite the equal of the men who come from the best law schools in this country.
Pursuant to the resolution offered by Mr. Steele and adopted, I will appoint on the committee to select names to be considered by the Association as officers for the next year, Mr. Steele, Mr. Gast, Mr. Murfree, Mr. Blood and Mr. Dawson.
Henry F. May:
There is one brief matter which I want to call up, and that is the attacks which have been made upon members of the court because of the decision of the Supreme Court on the eight hour law. I am quite sure that it is the sentiment of almost all, if not all the members of this Association, that some expression ought to be given to refute those attacks, and I would therefore move that the chair appoint a committee to draft resolutions to express the view of this Association as to those attacks.
Motion seconded and unanimously carried.
The chair will appoint the coinmittee while we are hearing the report of the Committee on Legal Biography.
The report of the committee was presented by Mr. Charles 2. Gast, as follows:
The Committee on Legal Biography beg leave to report that during the past year there have been two deaths of members of the Association, Oscar F. A. Greene, of Boulder, and Henry P. Krell, of Leadville.
The following brief sketches have been prepared by friends of the deceased :
(The sketches will be found in the Appendir.)
I will appoint on the committee mentioned in the motion of Mr. May: Mr. May, Mr. Downer and Mr. Riddell.
Lucius W. Hloyt:
Mr. Chairman, I will say that the American Bar Association, at its last session, following a recommendation made by the Illinois State Bar Association, made a request that the hundredth anniversary of the elevation to the Supreme bench of Justice Marshall be celebrated in the different states by the different state bar associations. The matter was put upon the program for the consideration of this Bar Association at this time.
W. H. Bryant:
I move we concur in any efforts made by the American Bar Association to celebrate “John Marshall Day."
Lucius W. Hoyt:
I will say to the Association we have in two years of our existence, at least, held a midwinter meeting, and it seems to me it would be appropriate that our midwinter meeting be devoted to the celebration of this event. This meeting will be on the 4th of next February.
W. H. Bryant:
I would embody that in my motion, that we concur in the recommendations of the American Bar Association, and that our midwinter meeting in February be devoted to the celebration of "John Marshall Day," and that a committee be appointed to prepare a proper program.
Lucius W. Hoyt:
It was recommended that the different state associations celebrate that day. The American Bar Association, as you know, meets in August and holds only that meeting during the year. They recommend that the state associations take up this matter and celebrate, locally, the day.
Wouldn't this date interfere with matters that would be presented to the legislature? The thirty days for the introduction of bills will have passed, will it not?
Yes, if it is the purpose to celebrate this occasion in Feb. ruary and hold the midwinter meeting in February, it would be
too late for the consideration of the bills that we have already referred to the committee, to be brought back in December.
W. H. Bryant:
I would suggest, Mr. President, leaving the whole thing to the committee, the program and everything.
It is moved and seconded that the whole matter of “John Marshall Day” be left with the Executive Committee.
Place of next meeting.
I would move the matter of selection of time and place for the next annual meeting be left with the Executive Committee.
I move that we express to that committee our desire that that meeting be held at some other place than Denver if it can possibly be done.
Charles E. Gast:
I will make an amendment to refer the whole matter to the Executive ('ommittee. I thi we did that last year. We left it with the Executive ('ommittee to fix a time and place. I think there has been a very generally expressed opinion among the members that it is better for the Association, more pleasant and more agreeable, to meet somewhere in the country. And I think in leaving this matter to the Executive ('ommittee to have some expression from the Association that tlie vext meeting be held at Colorado Springs or some place in the vicinity of Colorado Springs, such as the Executive Committee may determine upon. We do not necessarily have to meet at Colorado Springs—meet at Manitou or Glenwood Springs or Broadmoor.
I think it is proper to state, in behalf of a majority of the committee, that they felt it was a mistake to call this meeting in Denver. Mr. Gast, will you put your suggestion into the form of an amendment?
Charles E. Gast:
My motion is that the matter of time of holding the next annual session be referred to the Executive Committee, but that the meeting be held either at Colorado Springs or Manitou or Broadmoor, as the Executive Committee may finally decide upon.
James H. Blood:
I will accept the amendment to this extent, that the matter be referred, the time of holding the next annual meeting be re. ferred to the Executive Committee, and the place be referred to the Executive Committee with the exception that we recom. mend that it shall not be held in Denver.
W. H. Bryant:
The difficulty about that is this: If you fix upon a definite place and say you shall go to Broadmoor, and then go to the people that run the hotels and the Casino there for accommodations for the banquet and so on, you might pay more perhaps than you otherwise would.
James H. Blood:
Last year the selection of delegates to the American Bar Association was left with the Executive Committee in order that they might ascertain who would probably go and appoint those who would attend.
John H. Denison:
The Committee on Resolutions report the preamble and res. olutions as follows:
Whereas, It is the duty of the members of the bar to uphold the court and defend it when unjustly attacked; and,
Whereas, This Association has noticed with regret the recent attacks that have been made upon the judges of the Supreme Court of this state because of the decision rendered by the court upon the "eight-hour law," so-called; and,
Whereas, This Association believes that attacks so made are not only unjust, but that they tend to destroy the independence of the judges;
Resolved, That it is the opinion of the Colorado Bar Association that the attacks made upon members of the Supreme Court because of the decision of that court in the "eight-hour" case are unwarranted, unjust, tend to destroy the independence of the judges and ought to be discouraged.
I move their adoption.
I have only one objection to it and that is, resolutions which are directed to so great a breach of the relations which should exist between the people and the judges of the Supreme Court should be stronger. I think I express the sentiment of the members of the bar generally when I say that in the whole Western country there has not been a more unwarranted, more unjust, more indefensible attack upon the integrity and the honor of the bench and in particular upon the independence and the in. tegrity of one of the individual members of the bench than has been made in this state, apparently with the concurrence and support of many men who are in some lines distinguished, and that it is due to the bar of this siate at this meeting or any other meeting, when the opportunity offers, to express in no unmeasured terms, condemnation of such an assault. It is no idle boast to say of this profession that in the history of England and this country it has always stood as the defender of the liberties and the interests of the people, and that what we have borrowed from England has been borrowed because it was incorporated in the laws of England at the demand of those who had become members of the legal profession. It is true that this is a democratic government. It is true that the individual members have the right of free speech. It is true that they may condemn their officials. But, it is too often also true that an indiscriminate assault is often made upon officials without just cause or provocation, induced solely and alone by so-called polit. ical necessities. In my own judgment, the assault made upon