mission in evidence, or to its force and effect as such. Neither shall any proof of the execution of any such original title, or second original pr testimonio of such title, or copy thereof, be required in order to admit it, when the same is offered in evidence upon such trial."

The effect of this section would be to provide those who bring suits under the act with a method of establishing their case which has never been enjoyed by litigants, and which, in my judgment, would be a very dangerous innovation upon the rules of evidence which have been prescribed by the Legislatures or enforced by the courts of countries which have adopted the common law.

The courts understand the difficulty in proving an instrument which was executed in a previous generation so as to make it admissible in evidence, and have established as liberal rules therefor as practice and experience have shown to be compatible with safety. Where an instrument is thirty years old and unblemished by alterations, and from the proper custody, it proves itself

and is admissible in evidence.

comes

The rules laid down by the Supreme Court of Texas in the case of the State vs. Cardenas, 47 Texas, 287, were greatly modified by the decision of the same court in the case of Von Rosenberg vs. Haynes, 85 Texas, 366, and it is difficult to see how there could be any serious difficulty in establishing the rights of the owners of the land in view of these modifications.

Under the terms of the section which has been quoted, any instrument, or a copy of one, which has been spread upon the records of a county for five years, although neither acknowledged nor proven for record, would be admissible in evidence without any other proof of its genuineness.

I can see no reason for such a radical change in the rules of evidence which have been sanctioned by the experience of ages.

I am unaware of any constitutional objections to the bill.

That there should be legislation with reference to the lands which are the subject matter of the measure under consideration, is too clear to admit of question. The occupants of some of the lands, and those under whom they hold, have been in possession of the lands claimed by them in good faith, and have paid taxes on them for over half of a century.

In such cases the State ought to require little, if any, additional proof of the validity of their original grants before investing the owners with the se

curity which comes from the possession of a patent.

It is true that limitation does not run against the State, but the State could well afford to waive her exemption in favor of those whose titles must be established by the proof of circumstances which existed at such a remote period that no witnesses to them are probably living.

It has ever been, and should continue to be, the policy of the State to in every way possible quiet the titles of those whose bona fide claims are entitled to recognition.

Investigation has satisfied me that in some instances the claims of those in possession of the lands which would be affected by the proposed legislation are without merit. In these cases, I think the interests of the State can be protected under existing laws. In those cases where there can be no reasonable doubt of the justness of the claims of the occupants of the lands, although the ev idences by which they could establish their rights are no longer available, there ought to be some method provided by which they will be quieted in the pos session and ownership of their property. This relief must come from legislative action, but in granting it, while dealing with the utmost liberality with bona fide claimants, no measure should be adopted which would render it impracticable to successfully resist the efforts of those who are not so.

To the Secretary of State:

Senate bill No. 22, entitled "An Act to provide for the incorporation of mutual fire insurance companies and define their powers and duties," is herewith transmitted, disapproved.

The ground of objection is, that sufficient protection is not furnished. the policy holders in such companies as may be organized thereunder.

The Commissioner of Insurance is authorized by law, either in person or through an examiner, to require free access to all books and papers of any insurance company doing business in this State; and, also to revoke its permit to do business if the condition of such company should, in his judgment, justify such action. Companies organized under the bill, should it become law, would be exempt from the exercise of such authority by the Commissioner.

Again, Sections 5 and 6 provide for the establishment of a guarantee fund

of not less than $50,000, divided into certificates of $50 each, and require that only ten per cent. of such certificates shall be paid in cash, the holders of these certificates, however, to be entitled to three per cent. semi-annual dividend. It will readily be perceived that the un: paid portion, that is, ninety per cent. of these certificates, representing the guarantee reserve fund, would be valueless in securing the payment of claims, unless

the holders of such certificates should be financially responsible. These sections also provide, that the holders of each of these certificates of $50 shall be entitled to one vote for every such certificate, thereby creating one thousand votes for controlling the management of the company. True it is, that the holders of insurance contracts would be entitled to one vote each without regard to the amount of insurance carried, but this small share in the management of the company would not afford sufficient protection to the policy holders.

Finally, no penalty is provided for the violation of any of the requirements imposed upon such companies, and in this failure to provide proper penalties for such violations the policy holder is subjected to additional danger.

JOSEPH D. SAYERS,

For pay of Lieutenant Governor while acting as Governor......$ (See page 1270.)

MISCELLANEOUS.

To pay Jink Evans' salary as industrial manager State Orphans' Asylum from March 1, 1897, to February 28, 1899. To pay Mrs. Mary J. Jones excess of purchase money on Survey No. 10, Certificate No. 529, B. B. B. and C. R. R. Co., containing 640 acres of land, in Callahan county.. (See page 1282.)

To pay the claim of W. T. Coon for money paid into the treasury through mistake in the purchase of northeast quarter of Section 312, Certificate 20/177 ..

To pay claim of Thomas Windham for money paid into treasury as a payment on Survey No. 130, G. H. & H. Ry. land in Callahan county, and erroneously applied to the payment on Survey No. 130, H. & T. C. Ry. Co. in Eastland county..

To pay W. S. Gabriel for salary due him as court stenographer Supreme Court of Texas from February 1, 1896, to October 15, 1898..

To pay A. Parker, county surveyor of El Paso county, for making field notes of about 2,000,000, surveyed by him in El Paso county....

For making copies of said field notes for General Land Office

(See page 1283.)