The Bulletin of the Commercial Law League of America is published monthly and issued from its headquarters, 184 La Salle Street, Chicago, Ill. The Bulletin is published and intended as a means of communication among our members, and it is desired that every member shall have a personal interest in it. Articles on matters of interest to the League, personal mention of members individually, etc., are requested for publication. If written at too great length, communications may be condensed. The Bulletin is published gratis to its members. Extra copies furnished without charge. THE BULLETIN OF THE COMMERCIAL LAW LEAGUE OF AMERICA Published Monthly by COMMERCIAL LAW LEAGUE OF AMERICA, 184 La Ralle St., Chicago, III. The League is frequently considering the questions to take up for the improvement of commercial law and the practice of commercial law. These are questions of equal importance, and I believe that it is time for the Commercial Law League, and the commercial lawyer, to take up the question of the statutes of various states, relative to the treatment of foreign corporations, and the unwarranted statutes passed concerning them. I believe here is an opportunity for the League to take the lead and handle the question of a modification of all of these statutes, and to bring to its aid the other organzations and it would well become us, as lawyers, to endeavor to stamp out an abuse which is of no value to us, nor to the community, but is developing a serious detriment to our clients. This is not a local question. The lawyer of Illinois can join as heartily with the lawyer of any other state in forcing a modification of all of these laws. In a recent decision of this state, by the Appellate (not a court of last resort), the editors of the legal journal, have her alded the idea that the mere bringing of a suit by a foreign cor poration, where the contract is made in a foreign jurisdiction, and where no business is conducted in Illinois, that the act alone of bringing the suit brings them within the purview of these statutes, so that they are not able to recover for any debt due them in this state. This, I think, is a broader statement of the proposition than the decision warrants, but the conditions have reached a point where the failure to obtain a foreign license is almost a bar to the recovery of the debt arising out of interstate com merce. The question of interstate commerce is discussed and urged as applicable, and decisions of the United States Supreme Court are cited, but when it comes to a practical demonstration of the proposition, the non-resident corporation has limited opportunity to have its just rights enforced in states where it has not taken out a license. It seems that in many states they use this flimsy excuse to defeat a good many just contracts. The original idea in connection with this law was not to create a restriction upon interstate commerce, but it was where corporations in a foreign jurisdiction raised controversies in matters of business contracts, and compelled one to go into their home jurisdiction in order to prosecute a suit against them, their claim being that there was no one in this state upon whom service of process could be had; and the thought and object to be obtained was, simply to enable persons outside of the home jurisdiction of the corporation to bring a suit against it, and serve its agents, so that the case might be tried where the cause of action arose; and this is practically all the need there is of a law of this character, and the law should be modified to that extent, and have blotted out the other iniquitous conditions. Furthermore, the present laws, if they are to remain in the statute book, should be amended so that the foreign corporation could take out a license after a debt had been contracted, where the statute was pleaded to prevent a recovery. Frequently a corporation may have one transaction in a state, and not another one in that state in the course of years, and, yet, if a dispute arises, the defendant sets up the statute and defeats the recov ery. The advantage of these statutes to the legal fraternity, as a matter of business benefit, are not enough to give consideration; and even were it otherwise, there is a higher moral standard which we should recognize in the law among lawyers, and which should be recognized between the states, and that is a constitutional right to have free intercourse between the states for the purpose of trade, and that a contract made in America ought to be recognized as inviolate between the parties in any state. If our merchants and manufacturers are to adopt the code of morals that when they become hard up, or have lawful disputes, that they are going to raise this question and defeat the entire recovery, it is time that our profession raised its voice against such conduct; and we, as administrators of the law, should not be indirectly a party to such unchaste business morrals, and I should like to see President Deutsch commence at once, with this organization as a nucleus, to organize in every state to bring about this reform E. C. FERGUSON. THE UNIFORM RATE COMMITTEE. The Uniform Rate Committee, consisting of Henry W. Backus of Cincinnati, Herbert W. Barbour of Detroit, Edward E. Burkhart of Dayton, A. V. Cannon of Cleveland, and Thomas E. Lawrence of Buffalo, Chairman, are again taking up this matter along the lines outlined in the committee's report at the last convention. The committee expects soon to have a meeting at Cleveland to plan a careful campaign, followed by other meetings of the committee. At the last convention, it was voted that the report of the committee should be prepared and published in the Bulletin prior to the next convention. This the committee proposes to do. The committee wishes to announce at this time that the question is open for discussion and that they would be glad to receive the views of the members of the League put in the form of a definite schedule, together with brief written suggestions. The report of last year's committee with the discussion of the subject can be found in the convention proceedings contained in the September American Legal News. The definite and boiled down views of the members, in the form suggested above, will be of value and will be welcomed by the committee. THOMAS E. LAWRENCE, Chairman. 770 Ellicott Square, Buffalo, N. Y. The League has now about 400 members. What? You say only 400 I thought it was nearly 2,000. Well, I confess there are 2,000 members on the books, but-go to a convention for five successive years and count the new faces. Why, you know every body, or nearly so, and it causes one to think seriously why these same fellows come there year after year. Why does Dinkelspiel come from Frisco, Paddock from Texas, Bennett from Denver, Allen from Minneapolis, Napier from Atlanta and Madden from New Hampshire, and a host of other good fellows from all quarters, I think I can give you the answer. To begin with, these men are types of success, and are coupling success with success. -bear that closely in mind; and you will find these men year after year at these conventions, enlarging their mental vision by contact with the members from all over the country. Remember that different sections of the country produce different types, and different viewpoints, absorbed from the needs and characteristics of their locality; and the mingling with these men |