HUMOR. Old Attorney-Young man, it strikes me that you are very much attached to that young woman. Young Attorney- She owns three hundred acres of the best land in Kansas. Old Attorney-What has that got to do with the case? Two lawyers before a Probate Judge recently got in a hot wrangle. At last one, losing control of his emotion exclaimed to his opporrent:- Sir, you are, I think the biggest ass I had the misfortune to set eyes on." "Order!" said the judge gravely. "You seem to forget that I am in the room." Solicitor-General Wooten of the Albany, Ga. Circuit, was vigorously prosecuting a liquor case. Two quarts of the best of rye whiskey were introduced in evidence and as such were sent to the jury room for their consideration. After they had retired and remained in their room some time the attention of the court was directed that way by merry laughter and loud guffaws. Some two hours had elapsed and no verdict. The judge instructed the Sheriff to see if they could agree. Their answer was that "The Solicitor-General would have to send them another bottle of the same kind of evidence." Green Bag Poor Mike was supposed to be on his deathbed. His wife approached the bed and asked, "Mike, is there any thing I can do to make ye comfortable? "Yes, Bridget," he replied, "I t'ink I'd like a wee taste of the ham I smell a-boiling in the kitchen." "Divil a bit ye get," said Bridget, "that ham is for the wake." THE OKLAHOMA LAW JOURNAL VOL. 9. EDITED AND PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY D. H. FERNANDES, GUTHRIE, OKLAHOMA. A DEBTORS VOLUNTARY PETITION IN BANKRUPTCY. (official form.) To the Honorable. Judge of the District Court of the United States for the .... .. District of for the greater portion of six months next immediately preceding the filing of this petition at within said judicial district; that he owes debts which he is unable to pay in full; that he is willing to surrender all his property for the benefit of his creditors, except such as is exempt by law, and desires to obtain the benefit of the Act of Congress relating to Bankruptcy. That the schedule hereto annexed, marked exhibit A, and verified by your petitioners oath, contains a full and true statement of all his debts; and (so far as it is possible to ascertain) the names and p'aces of residence of his creditors, and such further statement concerning said debts as are required by the provisions of said acts: That the schedule here o annexed marked exhibit B, and verified by your petitioner's oath, contains an accurate inventory of all his property, both real and personal, and such other further statements concerning said property as are required by the provisions of said acts: Wherefore your petitioner prays, that he may be adjudged by the Court to be a bankrupt, within the purview of said acts. Petitioner. Attorney. United States of America, District of SS: I,..........,the petitioning debtor mentioned and described in the foregoing petition, do hereby make solemn oath that the statements contained therein are true, according to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. of ,Petitioner. ..day Subscribed and sworn to before me, this the.... . . To the above the first exhibit is a schedule or statement of all the debts of the applicant or petitioner; desig. nating on a separate sheet of the schedule what creditors hold securities. This is followed by an exhibit of creditors claims unsecured. Also one showing liabilities on bills and notes. These schedules must also be sworn to. THE GRANDFATHER CLAUSE. Just as we are closing the last pages of the forms for the Otober issue of this Journal, the Supreme Court handed down it's opinion in the much talked of Grandfather clause. It sustains this portion of our election law as constitutional and backs it up by logical authorities. The opinion is written by Judge R. L. Williams and concurred in by the other Justices. We cannot give the full opinion at this time but the syllabus is as follows: JOSEPH ATWATER, Plaintiff, VS. W. T. HANSETT, Defendant. (Rendered October 26th, 1910.) 1 (a) An act, entitled. “An Act carrying into effect provisions relating to the initiative and referendum; prescribing the method of procedure for submitting and voting for proposed amendments to the constitution and other propositions, and prescribing the method of appeal from petition filed or from the ballot title; repealing section 6 7 and 16 of article 1, chapter 14 of the Session Laws of Oklahoma, 1907-8," is not repugnant to section 57 of the constitution. (b) Said act is neither repugnant to sections 2 and 3 of article 5 of the constitution, nor sections 1 and 3 of article 24, of the constitution of this state. (c). Sec. 4. (a) of article 3 of the constitution, an amendment adopted at the election on the Tuesday in August, A. D. 1910, is not invalid for the reason that it was submitted at the primary election held "throughout the state" at said time and not at the general election to be held "throughout the state," at said time for the election of state officers on the second Tuesday of said year. (d) Said sec. 4 (a) of article 3, supra, is neither repugnant to sections 1 and 7 of article 3, nor section 6, article 1, or any other provision of the constitution. 2 (a) Said section 4 (a), article 3,supra, is neither in violation of the Fourteenth nor the Fifteenth amendment of the Federal Constitution. (b) Nor is said provision invalid on account of the following provision in section 3 of the enabling act: * The constitution shall be republican in form. and make no distinction in civil or political rights on account of race or color, and shall not be repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and the principles of the Declaration of Independence.' (Syllabus by the Court.) OPINION of the Court, by WILLIAMS, J. The decision covers twenty-three typewritten pages and goes fully into the election qualification precedents set by the laws of the various states, quoting at length from a number of the different state supreme courts. INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM PROVISIONS. The court holds that the initiative and referendum provisions of the Constitution are not self-executing, and that the special form of ballot required for amendments suggested by concurrent resolutions of the legislature is not necessary in an initiated measure. In the case of May & Thomas Hardware Co. vs. Mayor, etc., of Birmingham, 123 Alabama 305, an amendment to the Alabama constitution had been voted on as in our election by either leaving the words "For the amendment or striking out. and the supreme court held this to be a proper form. The court further holds that this provision, known as the grandfather clause, does not violate the constitution when it provides that the state "shall make no distinction in civil or political rights on account of race or color," as this law applies to aliens, the same as negroes, and that an alien coming from a land where there was no right of suffrage, must submit to the edicational test, the same as the descendants of slaves. |