Cases on docket of New Mexico district not finally disposed of; also status of each case.

57 Nicolas Duran de Chaves .. This is a claim for $513.62, for money damages against the

United States, under section 14 of the land court act, for 410.90 acres of land sold by the United States within the grant as confirmed.

REPORT OF THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL.

SANTA FE, N. MEX., July 19, 1902. DEAR SIR: In compliance with your request I have the honor to herewith submit report of the doings of my office since the date of my last report, July 12, 1901: During that time, at the request of different Territorial officers, boards, and commissions, I have given 26 written opinions, applicable to their several duties and functions, besides a large number of official letters giving advice and directions to public officers and boards, especially on the construction to be given the laws passed at the last session of the legislature amending our common-school laws.

I prepared deeds for the reconveyance of property donated for the subagricultural station at Aztec in accordance with the act of the last legislature.

I advised the Territorial board of equalization that it had power to raise the assessment in the different counties by uniform per cent upon personal property and town or city lots. This was done by the board, but its action was contested by an injunction, resulting in the district court overruling my position and denying the power of the board to make such rates. At your request I prepared letters to the boards of county commissioners, assessors, and treasurers of the various counties, urging them to assemble at the capitol in January last, when the Territorial board of equalization was in session, for the purpose of consulting together and with it for the purpose of devising ways and means to bring up the assessed value of the Territory to something near a reasonable value for purposes of taxation. All of the counties but one were represented at this meeting, and an arrangement was arrived at between the members present and the Territorial board which, it was hoped, would result in a substantial increase to our assessed value. This can not be ascertained, however, until the assessment rolls are in from the different counties, which will not be until September, but from what I have heard I am of the opinion that the assessment for the present year will show a substantial increase over that of 1901. If not, there must be some method devised to compel a proper assessment. Our present law is an excellent one on this subject if it were obeyed, but for years its provisions have been systematically and uniformly disregarded, with the evident intention of each county to rival the other in the smallness of assessed values. This policy results in a much higher rate of taxation than is necessary, is a great injustice to the few counties which return something approximating a fair value, and results in unequal and ununiform taxation. I have examined and passed upon a number of requisitions for the extradition of criminals to different States and Territories.

On April 28 last, at your suggestion, I filed a petition in the third judicial district court, asking leave for the Territory to intervene and be made a defendant in the suit pending in that court, wherein the United States was plaintiff and the Rio Grande Dam and Irrigation Company was defendant. This was done on account of the position taken by the attorneys for the Government that any dams constructed on the Rio Grande or any of its tributaries would be an interference with the flow of that river, affecting its navigation at a point 1,200 miles below the New Mexico line. As Congress by its act of June 21, 1898, had donated to the Territory 500,000 acres of land for the construction of reservoirs and 100,000 acres for the purpose of improving the surface flow of the Rio Grande, 200,000 acres of which former donation have already been selected and located for the purpose mentioned in the act, which would be rendered utterly valueless if the theory of the plaintiff were sustained in this case, I consider that the Territory had sufficient interest in the result to entitle it to be made a party to the suit, so that its rights might be shown and protected. This application was resisted by the Government, and the matter was submitted to Judge Parker on the 28th of June, where it is still under advisement.

Application was made to me to allow the name of the Territory to be used in a writ of quo warranto against a regent of the agricultural college, which I declined to grant. Thereupon the applicant filed a petition, with proposed information, in the district court of Santa Fe County, asking leave of the court to issue the suit. The court thereupon made an order for me to show cause why I had refused to comply with the request of the applicant, and the matter is set down for hearing on the 23d instant. These are the only two cases pending in the district court.

At the last term of the supreme court I argued and submitted for the Territory 13 cases-6 for murder, 1 assault with intent to kill, 2 for larceny of sheep, 3 for larceny of cattle, and 1 suit on bond. Four of these cases were dismissed on my motion for errors apparent on the face of the record and failure to file the same in the supreme court within the time prescribed by law. In these cases motions for rehearing were made which are still pending. I also appeared in that court in the case of McLean & Co. v. The Territory, involving the constitutionality of the hide-inspection law

passed by the last legislature. But the argument in that case was made in this court, as well as in the court below, by Mr. Spiess, the attorney for the cattle sanitary board. This case as well as six others are held under advisement by the supreme court and will probably be decided at its session in August.

In the case of Hagerman . The Territory, mentioned in my last report, which involved the question of whether the statute of limitation runs against the Territory in a suit for the collection of taxes, the supreme court unanimously affirmed the position of the Territory that it did not so run.

At this time all cases in the supreme court in which the Territory is a party are disposed of, with the exception of those mentioned above pending on motion for rehearing.

I have acted as a member of the United States commission to select lands for the Territory under the act, June 21, 1898, as a member of the Territorial board of public lands to lease and sell the lands selected and located, and as a member of the capitol custodian committee, having the care and control of the capitol building and grounds, each of which has held a regular monthly meeting and special meetings whenever they were necessary.

I desire to earnestly renew the recommendation made by me in my last report, that Congress pass a law providing the time within which Territorial acts should go into effect. Under the present law, unless otherwise provided in the act, all new laws take effect thirty days after their passage. But the custom of the legislature for many years past has been to provide "That this act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage." This practice works a great hardship and injustice on our people on account of the sparse population, great area of territory, and lack of rapid means of communication, as well as delay in the publication of the laws. The last legislature passed 108 acts, all but one of which were to take effect immediately. The legislature adjourned on the 21st of March and the laws were not printed and ready for distribution until the 1st of July, and during that time a term of court had been held in every county in the Territory, at which neither judges, attorneys, or litigants were informed of the laws in force-what had been repealed or amended or what new ones had been enacted. And I would earnestly recommend that no new act of the legislature should be in force until thirty days after its publication by the secretary of the Territory. Congress ought to provide for distributing the acts of Congress to the different Territorial officials, as many of these acts affect directly the conduct of business in the Territory, and are necessary to be known in order to comply with them, and at present even our judges are not supplied.

Very respectfully,

Hon. MIGUEL A. OTERO,

EDWARD L. BARTLETT,
Solicitor-General.

Governor.

THE SUPREME COURT.

SIR: In compliance with your request for information regarding the business of the supreme court of the Territory of New Mexico, I have the honor to respectfully submit the following statement as to the transactions of this court from July 1, 1901, to June 30, 1902:

At the date of my last report to you the court had several cases under advisement, all of which have been disposed of as well as most of the cases filed during the year, leaving only a few at this date that are as yet undetermined. I would respectfully call your attention to the fact that the business of this court has materially decreased since the present bench has been acting, which shows very plainly the satisfaction that the present judiciary of the Territory has given and the close attention that is given by them to the determination and final decision of cases in the district court, thus leaving very little if any ground for appeal.

At the end of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1902, the status of the docket of this court was as follows:

The cases above enumerated were brought into this court as follows:

The above cases are shown on the docket of this court to be in the following status as to the disposition of the same during the fiscal year, viz:

Besides the above, my last report to you shows that at that date there were pending in the Supreme Court of the United States three appeals taken from this court. Of these the following disposition has been made:

Affirmed..

Undecided.

2

Total.

3

During the fiscal year one other case has been appealed, leaving, at this date two cases of appeal from this court to the Supreme Court of the United States undetermined. On the first day of the last regular session of this court, which was the first Wednesday after the first Monday in January, there were examined by the court 25 applications then on file in this court. Of this number 24 persons were admitted to practice law, and one was granted an extension of his temporary license for one year. Besides this one extension, 7 other extensions were granted to applicants not present, upon proper showing having been made to the court.

The papers and files of this office are kept in very good shape and order and easy of access. The records of this court are written by typewriter, giving a more uniform and neat appearance to the records of the court.

Very respectfully submitted.

JOSÉ D. SENA,

Clerk Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Hon. MIGUEL A. OTERO,

Governor of New Mexico.

REPORT OF SECRETARY OF BAR ASSOCIATION.

SANTE FE, N. MEX., July 21, 1902.

DEAR SIR: I take pleasure in complying with your request for a report upon the New Mexico Bar Association, to be used in your report to the honorable Secretary of the Interior, as it is a fact which is little known that we are among the very first of the State or Territorial bar associations to be organized west of the Mississippi River. Of the 38 State and Territorial bar associations in the United States, 19 were organized before ours and 17 after. I have been unable to get the date of the organization of the associations in Kentucky and Mississippi, although I have written to the secretaries for the same. Our work, while done quietly, has been valuable and far reaching, not only for the profession, but for the advantage of the people in the Territory generally. The money which we have contributed has been expended for necessary printing, the purchase of rare and valuable books, and flowers for our dead. A brief résumé of the work of the association may be interesting:

It was organized at Sante Fe January 19, 1886. The constitution and by-laws adopted were based upon those of Illinois and Missouri. They have been amended at various sessions since to meet changed conditions.

Hon. William A. Vincent, who shortly afterwards was chief justice of the Territory, was the first president. He has since removed to Chicago, where he is now practicing his profession.

At the session of 1887 a strong memorial was addressed to Congress urging the passage of an act for the settlement of land-grant titles in the Territory; also a memorial to the Territorial legislature recommending the passage of various laws to conform to modern usage and practice. Several of these laws recommended by the association were enacted by the legislature. The report was prepared by Hon. John H. Knaebel, and is a most instructive and interesting document. At the session of 1888 the then president, Mr. Field, called the attention of the association to the gross abuses practiced by district attorneys and clerks of the court in the matter of their fees and the enormous expenses entailed on the Territory thereby, upon which the association took such prompt action that the flagrant abuses complained of were promptly corrected at the following session of the legislature. At this session delegates were first elected to the American Bar Association, and we have continued to elect delegates since. At the session of 1889 this association became a member of the National Bar Association and elected delegates thereto. It prepared and recommended for passage a number of important bills, all of which were enacted into laws by the legislature, among them the act to correct the "omissions, inconsistencies, and contradictions" in the compiled laws of 1884--the act relating to probate law, administration and wills, the assignment law, the act prescribing form of acknowledgments to deeds, as recommended by the National Bar Association, and a number of others of less importance. The committee on the history of bench and bar was created at this session, the reports of which have been an unique and interesting feature of the meetings since. At the session of 1890 the then president, Mr. Springer, in his address, again called the attention of the association to the necessity of Congressional action in the settlement of private land grants. The association took hold of this matter with such vigor that its memorial to Congress on the subject was acted upon by that body in the following year by creating the Court of Private Land claims, embodying in the act most of the recommendations of the association. It also memorialized Congress for the creation of the fourth and fifth judicial districts, which was shortly after done. At the session of 1891, in his address to the association, the then president, Mr. Clancy, used the following language:

"Before concluding I must congratulate you upon what the association has succeeded in accomplishing during its brief existence. It is but five years since our first organization, and yet, as direct results of our exertions, abuses of their official powers by public prosecutors have been suppressed; robbery of the public treasury by courts and court officials has been stopped; beneficial legislation has been secured on the subject of wills and descents, negotiable paper, acknowledgments of deeds, justices of the peace and constables, assignments, pleading, evidence, and others, including the passage of acts to remedy numerous inconsistencies and contradictions in our statutes.'

At this session bills were prepared and recommended, which were enacted into laws by the legislature, providing for the summer session of the supreme court, redistricting the Territory for judicial purposes and fixing the time for holding courts in the several counties, relative to judgment liens, the law fixing "return days" and relative to appeals and writs of error, and the crimes law, defining murder and other felonies, and taking away the powers of juries to fix punishments.

In 1892 the association prepared amendments to the act creating the Court of Private Land Claims and an elaborate argument in favor of them, and appointed a committee to present and urge the same upon Congress. It also prepared, printed, and paid for the rules of the Court of Private Land Claims, these rules being adopted by it and now in force.

At the session of 1893 the association was incorporated under the Territorial laws. A complete set of rules for the supreme and district courts in law and equity was carefully prepared and submitted to the supreme court, then in session, which adopted and promulgated the same. The association paid the expense of proper indexing of the same and assumed to pay for the printing if it should be necessary, but it was afterwards discovered that this expense could be, and was, paid by the Territory. At the session of 1894 the matter of a code for the Territory was thoroughly discussed, and the first steps were taken in the direction of a code by appointing a committee of five to prepare and present to the next meeting a code of civil practice. At the session of 1895 this committee reported a proposed code, which was discussed for several days and nights, section by section, amended and changed, and finally adopted by a vote of 31 ayes to 15 noes, and recommended to the legislature,