Albuquerque morning journal., 1910-07-27

cur to the membersof the house tha'
certainly this is the most remarkable
piece of legislation ever enacted. IN
/ stead of being entitled AN act to
regulate the procedure In certain
. cases In the territory Of New Mexico,
Il should have been entitled IAN act
to prevent the recovery Of damages
/ for injuries received in accidents or
otherwise upon railways, within that
territory This resolution passed
the house about year ago. too late
to receive the attention Of the sem
ate 1t has now been passed by the
senate and unanimously reported by
the committee on territories. II is
i only necessary to call the attention
Of the house to three or four proVi-
slons of the legislation Of New Mexico
to demonstrate Its iniquity.
4 We are all aware OF the fact that
In cases of death or accident result
ing In death there Is no survival OF
the action unless preserved by the
statute or the state. This law under
takes to make as condition prece-
/ dent to recovery OF damages In any
action for personal injury that within
ninety days the person injured shall
serve upon the offending party an
affidavit containing the particulars OF
the accident, the nature OF the in1ur-
les received, the witnesses by whom
II Is expected TO be shown their
names and their residences IT fur
ther provides that this affidavit must
he made within the territory OF New
| Mexico, before an officer In that ter
ritory qualified to administer oaths
So that II one of you were travelling
within the territory of New Mexico
and was injured in railway accident
and returned TO your home, you
would have to again go to the terri
tory of New Mexico and swear to this
affidavit
III further limits the recovery in
actions of this nature, fixes the period
of Limitation at one year, and that Is
a shorter period than that prescribed
by any statute that ! know Of within
any state or territory in the United
States.
| II contains another peculiar provi-
sion that in case the railroad COM
pany. or any person who has an idea
that you may have an action against
them for personal injury they may
compel you to come into court upon
notice, and bring your suit, file your
declaration, and proceed against
them This is an innovation upon the
law OF every state and every territory
and every nation, as far as | know.
the only exception being the old ac-
ton terms "quietus tenet an action
to quiet title.
| ! know Of no state or territory In
the Union that has u law whereby
you may bring person into court 70
sue you, and If you fail to appear
| the parties get what is termed judg-
ment Of non-liabilty against you, or
| II the court adjudicates that you have
no cause of action against them.
| Mr.. Crumpackeri VIII the gentle
man permit a question?
Mr.. Birdsall Yes
Mr.. Crumpacker; Does the rail-
road company, the defendant In q
personal-injury case, the company
that inflicted the injury. become the
plaintiff in this peculiar and extra
ordinary proceeding?
Mr.. Birdsall. II does.
Mr.. Crumpacker: And recover the
judgment against the person Injured
| MIR. Birdsall: Against the party,
OF what is termed non-liability
| Iaughter.) That seems litle pc
/ culiar, but the Texas court of APP
peals had this question before It.
Mr.. Crumpackeri ] am somewhat
| familiar with the statute. There is a
bill pending now on the calendar
from the committee on territories in
the house disapproving Of this same
law
Mr.. Hamilton of Michigan; That is
this bill
Mr.. crumpacker. This is a senate
resolution
Mr.. Birdsall. II has passed the
senate and is reported from the com
mittee on territories.
MIR Crumpackcr; We passed the
same bill through the last congress.
Mr.. Birdsall: Yes.
MIR. Crumpacker: And then re-
ported one In this
MIR. Brdsall | say this Is a pecul-
lar proposition; but the circuit court
of appeals had the question before IL
i'm suit brought in the state of
Texas after New Mexico court had
declared Judgment OF non-liability,
and the court of appeals OF Texas
said that while this was n very pecul-
lar statute. that II was unique In its
character and its purpose, yet they
w-tv not authorized - Say that II Is
not such as the territory of New Mex
leo had the power to pass and It was
Tor that territory TO determine; and
that court held that 1t was bar to a
suit brought against a railroad com
pany in the state of Texas.
The whole purpose of this statute
was 90 compel the bringing of all ac-
tions Of this character which are Of
a transitory nature, SO recognized by
all the courts of the United States,
within the territory OF New Mexico.
and TO compel them to he brought
either In the county whore the action
occurred or az the principal place of
business OF the railway company. So
that citizen of New Mexico would
have TO travel perhaps two or three
hundred miles in order To bring his
suit Another peculiar provision Is
this, II provides that such action
l H.