Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1903-07-17
United States Supreme Court
Justice Delivers an Address
at Des Moines
HE TAKES ADVANCED GROUND
Deprecates Tendency to Restrict Ju-
dicial Powers and Desire for Secrecy
His Position Regarding Divorces
Judge Wakefield Elected President of
State Association.

Des Moines, July 17.-Justice Brewer
delivered his address today before the
State Bar Association and took adj
vanced ground in regard to many mat
tiers. He insisted there was too great a
tendency to restrict judicial powers, as
in the case of injunctions, and too much
of a desire for secrecy. He declared
that it would be better to have no di-
vorces than that they should be in Sc
cret. He advised permanent tenure
for all judges and law gorbidding any
judicial officer from accepting a politi-
cal Office.
This afternoon Judge Wakefield. of
Sioux City. was elected president; A. e.
Swisher, Of Iowa City, vice president;
is. S. Wright, of Upton, secretary; and
George +. Henry, OF Des Moines,
treasurer.
Judge George w. Wakefield, of Sioux
City, acting president of the associa-
ton, delivered the presidents address
yesterday afternoon, devoting it to the
need of relief for the supreme court
and an advocacy of the establishment
of an appellate court.
F. f. Dawley, OF Cedar Rapids, pre-
scented an address on the submission
of cases to the supreme court under the
new law, which requires monthly sit
tings of the court and limits submits
sions at one hearing to the number of
cases that can be decided before an
other.
He said that the lawyers would be
accommodated if the court would take
submissions by districts. The numb
OF Submissions can only be determined
by experiment. AT present each judge
decides at the rate Of two and a half
cases week. The new statute will re-
ouire more time for submission, for it
encourages oral submission, without
which case always is but in part sub
mitted. 1t has been suggested that the
first two weeks of the month be de-
voted to taking submissions and the
rest to writing decisions.
It was quite apparent yesterday that
many of the lawyers OF the State Bar
Association do not concur with the SUI
preme court of Iowa in it's latest decis-
ion on municipal debt. Mr.. William
McNutt, of Ottumwa, and Judge S. NJ.
Weaver. OF the Supreme court, engaged
in an interesting little running debate
in the afternoon relative to this subject,
and the attitude of the attorneys pres
ent was made unmistakable.
I'm four decisions" said Mr.. McNett
"the Iowa supreme court decided that
municipality could not anticipate the
revenue Of more than the current
year"
WAS not that the theory of all of the
courts decisions on that point?" asked
Judge Weaver And is there any rea-
son in principle, Mr.. McNett. why If a
city may anticipate the revenue of a
single year from tax levied by au
thority Of law and pledged for a specific
purpose it may not also anticipate the
revenue from the same tax for a term
OF years."
81 do not undertake to defend the for
mer position of the honorable supreme
court as to anticipating the revenue for
single year, even." replied Mr. McNett,
but desire to call your attention to
the fact that until your most recent
decision municipalities in Iowa could
not incur debts beyond that years an
ticipation plus the constitutional linn
it,"
Mr.. McNett contended that the max
ers of the constitution Of 1857 knew
what they were doing and said what
meant to say. He called attention to
the fact that when the constitution
makers came to the question OF state
debt they provided that q debt in ex-
cess of the $250,0O0 constitutional limit
might be incurred in certain way;
That is, by authority of law which
should authorize tax to be levied for
not to exceed twenty years, and
pledged for the specific purpose for
which the money should be expended.
But when they came to the subject of
municipal debts they adopted a plain,
simple provision that no municipality
shall be allowed to become indebted
in any manner for any purpose in ex-
cess of five per cent Of the assessed
valuation of their property. He insist
ed that the constitution makers made
this distinction knowingly and for the
purpose of protecting the tax payers
from extraordinary debts, which they
would sooner or later have to liqui-
date.