Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1911-08-25
HERvEY NAILS
CAMP PA|GN LIE
There Was No Graft In Com.
pilation of New Mex
leo Statutes
THE WORK WAS WELL DONE
Will No Doubt Be Accepted and
Ratified by First State
Legislature.
Roswell, n. NJ, Aug. %.

There appeared in the Roswell
/ Morning News of even date an edito-
rial entitled The First State Legis-
lature." from which the following is
an extract:
| 1T will be remembered that the
! legislature of 1907, created a commits
| sion to revise the laws of New Mexi-
| co and appropriated twenty thousand
| dollars to pay the salaries and ex-
penses Of the commission. The COM
mission was TO report to the legisla-
! ture of 1909 with their work finished.
In 1909 the commission reported that
they had absorbed the twenty thou
sand had accomplished practically
nothing, that they wanted continua-
| ton of the stipend allowed the men,
bers and a fat sum for the employ
! ment Of an expert to do the work
| for which they had been paid. This
| report was made privately to Gov
ernor Curry and was for the time a
party secret, but such things will
| leak 1t was too rank for Curry and
the Republican members of the 3Sth
legislature. 1t was therefore an
nounced that as we We're upon the
eve of Statehood and so many new
| laws would have to be enacted to fit
the changed conditions following our
admission, it would be better to with
hold the report of revision until
Statehood should be an accomplished
| fact. Such is the status Of affairs
today"
If there was one syllable Of truth
in any of the above statements, with
the exception of the first sentence
wherein it is stated that a law revi.
sion commission was created, the
writer would not deem it of sufficient
importance to answer it, but when a
newspaper makes positive statements
which are absolutely false and with
out any foundation whatever, it is the
duty of any person who has knowledge
of the facts of the matter attempted
to be handled, to answer it.
These statements are libels, not on.
ly upon the members of the legislature
of 1909, but also upon the members OF
the Law Revision Commission The
undersigned was member of the
Law Revision Commission and helped
to make the final report to the legisla-
ture of 1909. At the time the report
was made the Law Revision Commits
sion consisted of H. M. Dougherty, of
iSocorro, Julius Staab of Albuquerque.
Louis Ilfeld of Las Vegas, B. NJ Read
OF Santa Fe, and the undersigned.
There was bestowed upon this revi-
sion by each member of this commits
sion from six months to years hard
work. The writer probably did less
work than any other member of the
commission and he put in about four
months of constant work, aside from
working several days in each month
going over the work of the other
members of the commission and of the
expert employed to bring the work
together and put it in shape for final
submission. The report referred to
as secret report was written by the
undersigned several days before the
legislature met and several hundred
among the members of the legisla-
ture. This was of course summary
of the work done by the commission
: and urged thorough investigation
! of the revision OF course the revi-
| sion itself would consist of five or six
thousand pages, and copies could not
be distributed to each member. Abso-
lutely contrary to this editorial the
work of law revision was completed
long before the meeting of the legis.
lature, including the work of J. E
= Cobbey, the expert revisionist EN-.
1 ployed to bring the work together
! under that part of the act providing
= for expert assistance. 1 doubt very
= much if any of the lawyers who were
members of this commission ever
q expended the same amount of work
:, for the compensation they did in max.
j. ing this revision. So far from making
secret report to the governor to GOV.
y er up anything, it is sufficient an.
!. swer to this that the house passed
by large majority bill adopting
this revision and putting 1t into eff.
feet. Will the gentleman who wrote
this editorial please tell us why the
house passed this bill if no revision
was forthcoming? To substantiate
.. this last statement we refer to Hon.
c. R. Brice, Democrat, who repre-
sented this district in she house in
1909. and who also examined the re.
, vision.
el 1t is not true that this commission
y requested any continuance of salary.
o 1t did, however, ask for an appropria.
leI tion to cover the cost Of indexing, sec.
e tionizing, printing and binding the re.
e vision, not one dollar of which would
o go'to any member of the commission.
l. The expert who was employed to az.
s. sist with this work was paid out OF
the fund set aside for stenographic
" and typewriter work, and the mem.
le bers did great deal of this work
" themselves in order to save money
N enough out Of the appropriation to
re pay this expert.
It, After the bill had been passed BY
N the house and had gone to the coun.
g Gil, Mr.. Catron raised the point thai