Page images


any member representing the Bar Association certainly, unless we made a recommendation. I understand the commission will fall, and leave this matter where we have had it for the last year, in the hands of our own committee to make suggestions, and as we decided yesterday to debate these matters at the next meeting, before the next session of the General Assembly we may be able to accomplish something in that way and accomplish better results than can be accomplished through any commission required to perform its services for nothing.

MR. MATHENY: It seems to me that this question has a somewhat broader relation than the mere matter of the practice commission. The object of this Association,-its watchword-has been law reform, we have had that as the principal purpose of our existence. If we are to do any good at all it must be done very largely through the Legislature. The Legislature has transmitted to us the responsibility and the honor of naming one member of a most important commission and it seems to me that for us to decline that honor would be a deliberate insult to the General Assembly, and would for years to come destroy our influence with the Legislature. It seems to me we ought to accept the responsibility tendered to us and name a member.

MR. LEE: I had not intended to say anything upon this subject, but it does seem to me that if this Association is going to be worthy of the purposes of its organization that when the Legislature, as representing the people of this State places a duty of this kind in our hands it is a public trust, and I, for one, would feel very much ashamed to go away from this meeting and have it said that a commission to reform the practice laws of this State failed because the Bar Association of the State of Illinois failed to perform a publie trust given to it by the Legislature. It seems to me we have tried this experiment of having committees, contain: ing many eminent members, who report year after year

[ocr errors][ocr errors]


needed reforms in the law, and the reforms do not come. Now we have an opportunity to present certain definite suggestions to the Legislature reinforced by the fact that the commission that makes them is organized under the law of the State for the purpose. I have listened with great interest to Judge Gross' valuable paper, but I must differ with him on one point. I think there are men in this State who are worthy and fit to sit on such a commission who will serve gratuitously. Recently I had occasion to consult with some other gentlemen about framing a law to create a commission for a public purpose, and after full discussion it was the unanimous opinion that it was desirable that no salary should be attached to the offices because otherwise the tendency would be to create a job, and that those who would fill that place might be those who were most able to secure political preferment. Now the character of the gentlemen who have already been appointed on that commission, or designated for it, is in my opinion a guaranty of its success. I believe these gentlemen or some of them are members already of this Association. I think it is not true to say that no member of the Bar of Illinois who is competent, is willing to thus serve the State. Many of them are willing to do something for the public. Few of us can make contributions in money, some of us can make contribution in time, but it seems to me it is a sad case in Illinois if there cannot be found competent men public-spirited enough to serve gratuitously in improv. ing the laws. I desire, before I take my seat, to offer an amendment, if I am in order, that the subject of the resolution be referred to the Committee on Nominations with instructions to report a name or names for consideration of this body before the adjournment.

MR. ZEISLER: I second the motion.

VICE PRESIDENT Wood: The question is on the adoption of the substitute offered by Mr. Stevens, which is that the Association decline to recommend, that is the effect of it, von ready for the question?



MR. SHERMAN: A motion to refer, as I understand it, takes precedence, and the motion of Mr. Lee that the matter be referred to the Committee on Nominations for its recommendation, that is a reference of the whole matter, temporarily.

VICE PRESIDENT Wood: It is moved now by Mr. Lee that the whole subject be referred to the Committee on Yominations with instructions to report the name of

MR. SHERMAX: One or more names.
MR. LEE: One or more names.

MR. MANN: The motion to refer, with instructions to a committee does not take the place of the substitute. The motion to refer the whole subject to a committee would have precedence over the substitute, not the motion to refer with instructions, and I think that the Association can very readily see the force of the point of order which I raise when you consider the scope of Mr. Lee's motion. It is not to consider the matter as to whether we shall or shall not appoint a member of this commission, or suggest a member of this commission, his motion is that the committee shall suggest the name or names of persons who shall sit upon this commission, so that Mr. Lee's motion is entirely inconsistent with the motion of Mr. Stevens.

MR. SHERMAN: If the gentleman's point be well taken then this is simply an amendment to an amendment and does take precedence. If this is not a motion to refer and thus a privileged question, or rather a question having precedence of the main motion, it is a motion to amend and should be first passed upon. MR. GROSS: A point of order:

: A point of order: Assuming this to be a motion to refer to the Nominating Committee, there is no such committee in existence. The committee that was appointed on yesterday was appointed for the purpose, as the record will show, of nominating officers for election by this Association for the ensuing year; that committee has dis



charged its duty, made its report, been discharged and is functus officio.

MR. RAYMOND: Following the cogent remarks of our venerable Judge Tuley, it seems to me that the question before this Association is whether we want to make a code State out of Illinois or not; personally, I say no. (Applause). Secondly, the remarks with reference to the obligation of this Association do not seem to me to be in point because this bill was passed through the Legislature without any consultation with this Association, not pursuant to any recommendation of this Association, and we are put in the hole to-day, to appoint somebody on a commission as to which, either as to its purpose or its organization we have had no participation whatever

MR. ZEISLER: I rise to a point of order.

MR. RAYMOND: I rise, Mr. Zeisler, for the purpose of making a motion.

MR. ZEISLER: The point of order is that the question before the house now is as to whether the point of order of Mr. Mann is well taken.

VICE PRESIDENT Wood: That is the question, and it was the understanding of the Chair that Mr. Raymond was speaking to that question.

MR. RAYMOND: And if we propose, by reason of our banquet of the evening not to discuss the matter further but refer it to a committee and leave it at sixes and sevens, I think it would not be dignified. But for the purpose, Mr. Chairman,—with all due respect to our honored friend, Judge William L. Gross-of testing the question as to whether we desire to make a code State out of Illinois and to participate in such a proceeding or not, I move to lay the whole matter on the table.

Which motion was seconded.
MR. RAYMOND: The motion is not debatable.


MR. LEE: I wish to withdraw my amendment and then support the motion that Judge Gross be designated by this body, and if I can get the consent of my second that would relieve this body of any question of order, by withdrawing my motion to refer it to the committee.

VICE PRESIDENT Wood: Is there objection to that motion?

MR. RAYMOND: I rise to a point of order, because my purpose in rising was to take a test vote upon that question and a motion to lay the whole matter on the table is not debatable.

MR. ZEISLER: I rise to a point of order.

VICE PRESIDENT Wood: One moment, gentleman. The motion was made that Judge Gross be declared the selection of this Association for the place upon that commission; a substitute was offered by Mr. Stevens that the Association decline recommend any person, then the motion was made by Mr. Lee to refer the whole matter to a committee with instructions. It was the opinion of the Chair at the time, that Mr. Lee's motion was not in order, but the point of order has been made by Mr. Mann, and the Chair is inclined to sustain the point of order that the motion of Mr. Lee was not in order The Chair understood that Mr. Raymond was speaking to that point of order. The question is on the adoption of the substitute offered by Mr. Stevens. If the Association does not wish to be represented on that commission they can adopt the substitute, if they wish to, they can vote the substitute down; are you ready for the question?

MR. ZEISLER: Question.

MR. MANN: Mr. Raymond went a little contrary to the rules, he spoke first and then made a motion to lay the whole matter on the table, but nevertheless he is in order.

VICE PRESIDENT Wood: The motion from Mr. Raymond to lay the whole matter on the table would be in order, but at the same time I understood Mr. Raymond to be speaking

« PreviousContinue »