Albuquerque morning journal., 1910-07-27
Mr.. Birdsall. Yes.

Mr.. Birdsall; II has been in force
in the territory of New Mexico, and II
has not only applied to personal
injury cases against railroad compan-
les, but has been held to apply be-
tween individuals and to all classes
of cases, even down to libel and
slander.
Mr. Driscoll: Suppose this is an
nulled by the action OF congress-;
what would be the legal status of peo-
pie to whom cause of action arose
during those five years? Can we
put them back into the same legal
status they would have been in If this
law had not been enacted?
Mr. Birdsall ] do not think so.
From my investigation | am satisfied
that this is not retroactive.
Mr.. Driscoll Does the gentleman
think that the rights that would inure
to them under the common law OF
negligence will all be renewed?
Mr.. Birdsall: / do not think so.
Mr.. Driscoll: If this is repealed or
declared void?
Mr. Blrdsall: / do not think so. /
think they will be governed by the
statute Of the territory OF New Mex
leo infamous as II Is, until this reso-
luton passes. In other words, the
law of a territory is the law until 1t
is disapproved by congress, and IT is
only affected by an act of disapproval
here, so It could not have any retro
active force.
Mr.. Driscoll: SO that by no action
on our part can the causes of action
be revised
Mr.. BirdsalI: l do not know OF
any.
Mr.. Driscoll. Which have been
outlawed or which have been lost by
force of this law which this resolu-
ton IL intended to repeal.
Mr.. Birdsall: do not think So I
am inclined to think it takes effect
only from the passage of resolution
here.
Mr.. stephens of Texas: ] desire to
ask the gentleman from Iowa If this
law Is repealed what law will cover
this class of cases in New Mexico?
Mr.. Birdsall; The common law.
Mr. Stephens OF Texas | thought
possibly there was some act equally
Objectionable TO this that might be
restored. If we repeal this act then,
| the heirs of those killed would have
no right OF action. ! know no way
OF forcing the legislature of New
Mexico to pass law
Mr.. Birdsall. ] do not see that we
can help that proposition.
Mr.. Payne: Why can not the con-
gress of the United States pass a
reasonable statute upon this subject,
and thus prevent the legislature of
New Mexico from inaugurating any
other-I was going to say fool legis-
lation--any other legislation on this
subject of a character similar to this?
Mr.. Birdsal. Well, there is no
doubt about the power of congress to
legislate for the territory, l will say
10 the gentleman from New York.
Mr.. Payne: DO not you think con-
gress ought TO do this? If you pass
this resolution and annul this stat
ute, what warrant of authority have
you that the legislature will not get
together on the first opportunity and
re- pass this statute?
Mr.. Birdsall: ! win say to the
gentleman that unless there Is some
change In conditions In the territory
of New Mexico 1t will be very wise
thing to do.
Mr.. Payne: ] hope the gentleman
and the committee on the judiciary
viii see to that
Mr. Clancy; Oought not there to
be some provision for the cases which
will be interfered with n we repeal
this statute by this resolution?
Mr. Blrdsall: | am satisfied there
is no way of providing, | will say TO
the gentleman from Indiana, to make
this resolution or action of ours retro
active SO as TO save any cases that
have been lost under this statute.
Mr.. Chaney: There will naturally
be some worthy cases---
Mr. Brdsall: There may be some
cases vet In existence within the
ninety days, so they would be pre-
served. but any case that has been
lost by virtue of this statute Is gone.
Mr.. Driscoil: Would not the rights
of the people under the common law
survive If this lis declared void?
MIR. Birdsall; | hope so. but | am
inclined 60 think not, will say to the
gentleman from New York. l reserve
the balance vi ins t.i..s.
Mr.. Henry of Texas: MIR. Speaker.
my object in demanding a second was
that we might have full explanation
In regard to this statute passed by the
Legislature OF New Mexico. The gem
tleman from Iowa is an able lawyer
and has very fully and satisfactorily
explained It. ] am thoroughly satls-
fled that congress should pass this
Joint resolution We not only have
the power to annul law enacted by
a territorial legislature, but In a case
like this Il becomes the duty of con-
gress to do so. Glancing AT some OF
the provisions Of this law hastily as II
has been possible FOR me TO do So |
believe with the gentleman from Iowa
that the statute should be properly
characterized as an infamous one. IL
is true that II we annul the statute
we are then RENTED to common-law
rights and remedies in the territory
of New Mexico. except where the en-
ployers liability bill may apply In
cases coming under its provisions.
Understanding the statute in the light
above indicated. I shall cast my vote
in favor of the joint resolution.
l.. -