« PreviousContinue »
Instead of having it a standing committee, it might be a committee like our General Council with members from each state and territory, so that they could aid in digesting the laws of their respective states. They would take more interest in the work than if they were simply called upon to volunteer information.
The Chair would suggest to the gentleman from the District of Columbia that he formulate a resolution to that effect, and hand it in to the Executive Committee.
Frederick W. Lehmann:
I suggest that the experience of the Presidents of the Association when it was their duty to compile a summary of legislation during the year and when they had the aid of a member from each state, was that it needed somebody specially designated to look after the matter. While it is the duty of members of the General Council to do so, still somebody has to keep the machinery moving. Now that is the purpose of a standing committee. I do not believe the committee should be too large. I think you would find that a committee composed of a member from each state would be no committee at all. You know the best committee in the world is composed of three persons, one of whom is sick, the second of whom does not care a continental about the work, and the third is the man who does all the work.
Under the old system, I think the President called upon the Vice-Presidents from the various states for information as to the legislation enacted during the year.
The Executive Committee will take the matter into consideration.*
The Special Committee on Reports and Digests.
* For final action establishing the Committee on Noteworthy Changes in Statute Law as a Standing Committee, see Report of Executive Committee (p. 83), and vote of the Association amending the Constitution (pp. 12-13).
Thomas H. Reynolds, of Missouri:
This committee, although last on the list, is not the least in importance. I doubt if there is any matter of greater importance before the Association than the work entrusted to this committee. The committee was appointed late in the we have not been able to hold a meeting to formulate a final report; but in correspondence we have obtained considerable valuable data. We have not been able to get all the data into shape, and if the committee be continued for another year we shall be able to make a full report. We have discovered that in the last twenty years the length of opinions has increased thirty per cent. Then when we go beyond the number and the length of opinions, we come to the digesting, and there we have a field that is perplexing. We will probably recommend to the Association that in statements of the facts, only the ultimate facts be stated and not the process of elimination of unnecessary matters by which the Court reaches an opinion. We believe the principles of law should then be stated and the conclusion announced. I think, without reading the report, that I will merely submit it and move the adoption of the suggestion that the committee be continued.
On vote taken the special committee was continued.
(See Report in Appendix, page 618.) Stephen S. Gregory, of Illinois:
I have a resolution which is of such a character that it should be referred to the Executive Committee. I will simply submit it for reference to that committee, with the request that they report tomorrow morning.
The resolution submitted by the gentleman from Illinois will be referred to the Executive Committee for report at tomorrow morning's session.
The Executive Committee will meet immediately after adjournment of this session.
Adjourned to 8 o'clock P. M. the same day.
Wednesday, August 18, 1915.
The Secretary :
The Executive Committee will meet immediately after the adjournment of this session in the Presidential Suite, Hotel Utah.
The General Council will meet at 9 o'clock tomorrow morning in Barratt Hall.
We are to have the very great pleasure this evening of hearing from that member to whom we are most indebted for the foundation of the Association, and for the years of constant labor that he has bestowed upon it. I think there is no question that its great success is largely due to Simeon E. Baldwin, the scholar, the jurist and the patriot. It is a splendid thought that out of a busy life there has developed in American legal literature the scholar, the gentleman and the public servant who will now address you, Simeon E. Baldwin, of Connecticut.
Simeon E. Baldwin, of Connecticut, then delivered an address on “Changes in International Law.”
(See the address in the Appendix, page 354.) The President:
If there is no other business before the Association, a motion to adjourn will be in order.
(At this point there were cries of “ Taft! Taft! Taft!” from the members.)
I take very great pleasure in introducing to you a great lawyer and a great judge, a member of this Association and its former President-William Howard Taft, of Connecticut.
The audience rose and greeted Mr. Taft by vigorous applause.
William Howard Taft, of Connecticut:
I came here tonight to be informed; and I have been. We are greatly indebted as we have been so often in the past, to Governor Baldwin for giving us things that we frequently don't get in speeches, and that is the facts, and giving us a means of judging for ourselves upon the great questions now presenting themselves to us as members of a great nation critically concerned in proposed changes in international law.
And I rise for the purpose of moving that the thanks of the Association be expressed to him for his admirable and informing address, undertaken under conditions that no one could possibly meet except a man who is a minute man always when the American Bar calls upon him, and who possesses so much knowledge that it does not take so much work for him to prepare it for presentation. I hope that this vote of thanks will be submitted to the Association.
Simeon E. Baldwin :
I rise to the point of order, that under the Constitution, no vote of thanks is permissible to a member of the Association for anything that he does.
William Howard Taft: 'I withdraw the motion, and I concur in the adjournment which the Chair has declared.
William Howard Taft:
Why, I understood that the Chair not only put a motion to adjourn, but declared it carried.
I was about to put the question when interrupted by a unanimous call. I recognized that call, and we had the very charming little speech from the gentleman from Connecticut whom we all love. Now apparently he is disposed to adjourn, and, as he generally has his own way-except upon certain occasions, and I trust no similar occasion will arise in the future—the Chair will put the question. All in favor of adjourning will say “ aye ”; opposed “no.” The Association stands adjourned.
Adjourned to Thursday, August 19, at 10 A. M.
Thursday, August 19, 1915. The President: The Association will come to order.
The first business is an address by Felix Frankfurter, of the Faculty of Law of Harvard University, on “The Law and the Law School."
It ought to be gratifying to the American Bar to observe the disposition on the part of the Association to encourage high scholarship among the members of the Bar. It may be remembered that only 17 years after the landing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth Rock, Harvard University was established. The influence of New England education has permeated the entire country. Though I come from a section in the far south whose politics have always been opposed to those of New England, I cannot even upon this occasion refrain from bowing to the culture and scholarof Harvard; and as typical of that scholarship and as a recognition on the part of the Association of its ideals for larger and broader culture, permit me to introduce to you Professor Frankfurter.
Felix Frankfurter, of Massachusetts, then delivered his address.
(See the Appendix, page 365.)
I will report, with the unanimous favorable recommendation of the Executive Committee, the resolution submitted yesterday by Stephen S. Gregory, of Illinois, and referred by the Chair to that committee.