The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1911-02-25
UNIFORMITY OF STATE
LEGISLATION DISCUSSED

Wv VuOOOOOlV
the session, and as no opposition was
expected, there was no one on hand to
counteract this statement, and the bill
failed. II the gentleman had had
much experience in discounting COM
mercial paper, he would have known
that the only ones who profit by the
three days of grace are the bankers.
who receive interest for that additional
time.
Our legislature meets biennially, and
in 1902, though the bill again passed
the senate, it was again defeated in
the house, because the gentlemen Sc
lected to take charge Of the bill in the
senate became out Of favor with the
powers that be-" and all the bills
which he fathered were killed in the
house.
This same legislature passed an act
authorizing the appointment Of COM
missioners on uniform laws. and among
these was Mr.. Thomas J. Herman
(since deceasedl, who was elected a
member of the house Of representatives
in 1904, and who by his transcendent
ability and great popularity, became
the leader of the house. He intro
sduced the bill, and soon 1t passed, and
watched its course in the senate,
where It met with practically no OPP :
position, and was Immediately signed
by the governor. The effect of this
law In our state has been practically
to end litigation as to promissory notes
and bills of exchange. At this time
recall but four cases where any ques-
ton of negotiability has been presented
on appeal, to our supreme court. In
two of these the law was followed and
cited, in one L was followed but not
cited: while In the first case. strange
to say. neither the supreme court nor
the counsel on either side mentioned
the law, and the final decision was d.
rectly opposed to the law. Parker vs..
Guillot. 11s La, 22a,. The law pro-
vides that any person not originally a
party to negotiable instrument. VINO
puts his name thereon Is presumed to
be an endorser. The former jurispru-
dence Of Louisiana was just the re-
verse, FOR such a person was pre-
sumed 20 be q surety; (Clafltn VS.. Fell
bleman. IA La. Ann. 618-24), and the
decision mentioned followed the for
mer decision Instead Of the lawA
Louisiana Not Unique.
Louisiana, however, Is not unique IN
this regard. Mr.. Amasa NJ Eaton. for
many years, and until 1909, the presi-
dent of the conference of commission
ers, in his annual report gives a sy-
| nopsis of all reported decisions on
the'negotiable instruments law and has
| frequently shown how the law has
been overlooked sometimes by the
| courts OF different states, though in the
same states generally it has been
recognized. followed. and referred to.
| l have beard some lawyers make a
complaint against the work Of the
commissioners on uniform state laws
on the ground that, by decreasing liti-
cation on particular subjects it inter-
feres with the lawyers practice and
Should be discouraged. In my juds-
ment, lawyers who make use Of such
/ arguments are FAR from being e credit
to the profession; for / believe it is
just as much the duty of the lawyer
to prevent litigation as it is for the
doctor to prevent disease, and no law
yer OF proper standing will suffer In
his general practice by the enactment
of uniform laws.
| The Sales ACT.
/ Referring again to 1908, the session
i OF the conference that year, provided
j for the preparation of a uniform law On
the sale Of personal property and i;
uniform law on the subject OF partner
ship.
! 'Tta first tentative draft Of the uni
form sales act was prepared by Pro-
fessOr Samuel Williston of the Har-
yard Law School, at the request Of the
commissioners on uniform state laws
in national conference. It was printed
in the fall Of 1909 and distributed with
a request for criticisms. Some were
received and in the light of these 8
second tentative draft was presented
to the commissioners at their meetias
at st. Louis. September %, % and "a
1904. The draft was then gone ovel
section by section. by the commission.
ers. Doubtful points and changes n
wording were discussed and voted
upon. The draft was then recommit
ted to the committee on commercial
law, with instructions to embody Tho
changes adopted by the commissioners
and to present a third tentative draft
at the meeting OF the commissioners IL
i August, 1905.
/ "A third tentative draft was pre-
scented in accordance with these in
structions. at the meeting Of the com
missioners at Narragansett Pier, In
August, 1905. This draft included 70,
the first time, a number Of sections or
documents of title (sections Is to 40 OF
the act as finally adopted). Because
Of these sections, 1t was thought bes,
once more to recommit the draft.
AT the meeting Of the conference n
st. Paul. in August. 1905, the final draf,
was adopted and recommended to thu
legislatures OF the several states fol
passage. 1t has since been enacted Il
the seven states and territories Of Ari-
IONA, Connecticut, Maryland. Massa-
chusetts. New Jersey. Ohio. and Rhode
Island
So far as my state il concerned, oul
commissioners have not recommended
this law to our legislature. because i;
Is so radical departure from our law
and Jurisprudence on the subject OF
sales as to be impossible Of passage
particularly as we believe our law sc
much better: but though small num-
Der OF states have 40 far adopted Il: