« PreviousContinue »
and those who were honored with his friendship will always cherish the memory of his high ideals, unfailing loyalty, and exalted character.
The Chairman :
The Secretary will now read a list of the names of those who have been recommended for membership in the new General Council.
The list was then read by Secretary Kemp. (See list of General Council, page 150.) The Association then adjourned until September 1, at 10 A. M.
Thursday, September 1, 10 A. M. Frederick W. Lehmann, of St. Louis, Mo., presiding. The Chairman:
The Secretary has some announcements to make before we take up the regular order.
The first announcement is of special importance. The management of Keith’s Theatre, where we held our meeting last evening, has kindly consented to permit the use of the theatre again this evening for the session which will be presided over by Ex-Senator Sutherland of Utah, a former President of the American Bar Association, and will be addressed by former Senator Charles S. Thomas, of Colorado. This address will be followed by a consideration of some committee reports as announced on the program.
The special feature for that session, not on the program, will be the presentation to our Association of a very handsome loving cup by two representatives of the Japanese Bar Association.
The Chairman :
The first business in order this morning is the Report of the Section of Criminal Law.
Section of Criminal Law:
Edwin M. Abbott, of Pennsylvania:
On behalf of the Section of Criminal Law, I desire to say that we have been doing much work at this, our second meeting, on the subject of criminal law. This Section now has a rightful place on the program, in that last year it was made a regular Section of the Association. Nearly all of the speeches which we have heard at our meeting here have dwelt upon lawlessness and in the Symposium, which is scheduled on your program for tomorrow morning, that subject will be the one dealt with. So we feel that at last the study and research along lines of criminal law have taken their rightful place in this great Association.
During the past year we have endeavored to enlist district attorneys and attorneys-general throughout the entire United States in our work. As a result we have secured, for the American Bar Association, 128 members including Harry M. Daugherty, the present Attorney-General of the United States.
I also desire to state that, starting with a small number of the membership of the American Bar Association we have today on our rolls over 500 persons who have manifested their interest in the work of the Section.
On behalf of the Section of Criminal Law, I extend to every member of the American Bar Association, who desires to study this branch of the law, an invitation, and an earnest one, to send in his name and address so that we may enroll him among our members.
Comparative Law Bureau:
Robert P. Shick, of Pennsylvania:
The report of the Comparative Law Bureau has already been put in print, and I will not burden you with reading it. We are asking of the Association this year no particular action. Mr. Smithers is with us as Chairman of the Bureau. We have been gratified with the interest shown in the work of the Bureau during the last year and with the renewed cooperation of others, and we believe that the work of the Bureau will be of increasing interest to the members of the Association in the future.
During the past year quite a large number of lawyers who are engaged in problems of international commerce looked to us for information-information which unfortunately we could not give to them, but realize and know that we have interested them in the subject of comparative law, and we hope that the Association will get great benefit from the work of our Bureau in the future.
Charles A. Woods, of South Carolina:
The work of the Judicial Section for the past year has been confined almost exclusively to calling the attention of the Appellate Judges of the United States, both federal and state, to the bill now before Congress, giving the Supreme Court of the United States the power, and directing it to frame a simple Code of Procedure and Practice in the Courts of the United States, and providing further that when those rules shall have been promulgated all of the statutes of the United States relating to practice and procedure shall be repealed.
The hope is that if the United States Supreme Court shall make a simple code of rules which will commend itself to the American Bar in actual practice it wil constitute a standard that all states will work for, and result in the simplification of procedure and practice in the entire country.
For the information of the Association, I beg to say that the federal judges, being directly concerned, were asked for their opinion of this bill. Of the 33 circuit judges, 27 approved; four opposed, and two are indifferent. Of the 102 United States district judges, 86 of whom replied, 60 approved, 21 opposed, and five were indifferent or said that they required further information.
Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar:
The Section of Legal Education has directed me to offer at this meeting of the American Bar Association, the following resolutions. They were framed and reported by a Special Committee raised by the Section. The committee met and heard
opinions from many persons interested in legal education, both in active practice and in the way of instr: tion. The report of the committee was fully discussed at gre: ; length yesterday in the Section of Legal Education and was overwhelmingly adopted. The resolutions are as follows:
Resolved, (1) The American Bar Association is of the opinion that every candidate for admission to the Bar shall give evidence of graduation from a law school complying with the following standards:
(a) It shall require as a condition of admission at least two years of study in a college.
(b) It shall require its students to pursue a course of three years' duration if they devote substantially all of their time to their studies and a longer course if they devote it to other studies.
(c) It shall supply an adequate library for the use of the students.
(d) It shall have among its teachers a sufficient number giving their entire time to the school to ensure absolute personal acquaintance and influence upon the whole student body.
(2) The American Bar Association is of the opinion that graduation from a law school should not confer the right of admission to the Bar, and that every candidate should be subject to an examination by public authority to determine his fitness,
(3) The Council on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar is directed to publish from time to time the names of those law schools which comply with the above standards and of those which do not, and make such publications available, so far as possible, to intending law students.
(4) The President of the Association and the Council on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, are directed to cooperate with the state and local bar associations to urge upon the duly constituted authorities of the several states the adoption of the above requirements for admission to the Bar.
(5) The Council on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar is directed to call a conference on legal education in the name of the American Bar Association, and the state and local associations shall be invited to send delegates for the purpose of uniting the bodies represented in an effort to create conditions favorable to the adoption of the principles above set forth.
The Association will perceive that these resolutions in their substance clearly reproduce the expressions which have already been rendered, in perhaps less positive form, by the American Bar Association.
With regard to the two years in college, the Association expressed itself by formal resolution passed in 1918.
In 31 of the 41 states having law schools all of the schools require the three-year course now. In the other ten states the majority of the law schools require a three-year course.
I move the adoption of these resolutions.
Henry E. Davis, of Washington, D. C.:
It is with some diffidence that I feel constrained to express the hope that these resolutions will not receive our approval at this meeting. I have in my hand bulletin No. 15, issued by the Carnegie Foundation on Training for the Public Profession of the Law, comprising, exclusive of the preface and appendix, 420 printed octavo pages. This bulletin was prepared by the Carnegie Foundation at the request of a special committee of the Section of Legal Education, pursuant to a resolution passed on February 7, 1913, and the Carnegie Foundation has spent eight years of patient labor in response to that request, and only as lately as Saturday last made public the result of its investigation.
Now, as a substitute for the resolutions which have been offered, I desire to present the following:
WHEREAS, The resolutions presented by the report of the Special Committee of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar recommend for approval by the Association sundry conditions severely restricting admissions not only to the Bar itself but also to the law schools, graduation from which is made an essential;
AND WHEREAS, There are now among the members of the Association many of high professional equipment and attainments, and of deserved prominence in the profession, as well as in public life and in their respective communities, whose admission to the Bar would have been precluded by the conditions aforesaid;
AND WHEREAS, In response to the definite request of a former Standing Committee of the Association on the subject, under date of February 7, 1913, the Carnegie Foundation has made a comprehensive investigation of Training for the Public Profession of the Law, and only as lately as August 27, 1921, has published the results of such investigation in its Bulletin No. 15, opportunity for consideration of which by the Association is highly desirable, if not indispensable, as precedent to intelligent action by the Association upon the weighty and important questions presented by the resolutions aforesaid:
Be it resolved, That consideration of the said resolutions and of the report accompanying the same, be, and hereby is postponed until the next annual meeting of the Association.
The substitute resolution offered by Mr. Davis was seconded.
I merely rise to say that the resolutions upon which the Section of Legal Education has acted, were prepared in conference with the authors of the report to which Mr. Davis has referred, and they were prepared after long study and consideration of that report, and they were based so far as seems practicable now upon the reasoning and the statements of that report. To use the report from which the committee based their recommendations