tion be urged to aid through appropriate committees in the maintenance of the high standard of professional conduct contained in the canons, and we further suggest that the subject might well be made a special order of business for discussion at the annual meetings of such associations.

Also resolved, That the Conference recommend to state and local bar associations that they give attention to the work of the New York, Detroit, St. Louis, and Kansas City Bar Associations in securing the nomination and election of fit judges, this to the end that the Judiciary of the country will at all times be filled with men in all respects qualified.

II.

WHEREAS, Under and by virtue of certain acts of Congress relating thereto, the Secretary of the Treasury has appointed a Committee on Enrollment and Disbarment to receive and consider applications to be recognized as attorney, agent or other representative before the Treasury Department or the several bureaus thereof; to receive complaints against those enrolled; conduct hearings; make inquiries; perform other duties as prescribed; and do all things necessary in the matter of proceedings for enrollment or disbarment of such attorneys, agents or other representatives, pursuant to the regulations of the Treasury Department.

WHEREAS, It is important that the said Committee on Enrollment and Disbarment have the assistance of qualified organizations in the different states in the securing of information concerning the character and qualifications of persons applying for enrollment as such agents and attorneys; and

WHEREAS, It is believed that this service can be rendered effectively by the several state and local bar associations of the country.

Now, therefore, resolved by the Conference of Bar Association Delegates attending the present session of the American Bar Association that we earnestly recommend to the several state and local bar associations of the United States that they shall each put themselves in communication with the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States and offer to render to the Committee on Enrollment and Disbarment appointed by him such assistance as they may be able in the investigation of character and the necessary qualifications of persons who may apply to said committee for recognition as agents and attorneys to represent those having business before the said department, and also in any investigation in disbarment proceedings or otherwise that may be made by said committee into the practices of any such agents and attorneys as may have been recognized by the said department, and that each of said bar associations shall delegate to a committee of its own body the performance of the duties and rendering of the service pertaining to the above mentioned matters, and communicate the names and address of said committee or its Chairman to the said Committee on Enrollment and Disbarment of the Treasury Department.

And further resolved, That the said committees of the bar associations of the respective states and of the local bar associations shall furnish to the Secretary of the Treasury from time to time through the said Committee on Enrollment and Disbarment such evidence as they may possess that would indicate the unfitness of any person admitted to practice before the Treasury Department or any applicant for such enrollment; and that said committee of said bar associations, upon request from the Secretary of the Treasury through said Committee on Enrollment and Disbarment, undertake to examine from time to time into the fitness of any person admitted to practice before the Treasury Department or any applicant for such enrollment, and in that connection to furnish to

the Secretary of the Treasury such information as may be available, it being understood that this Conference regards the giving of legal advice concerning income tax laws as the practice of the law.

REPORT ON BAR ORGANIZATION.

On behalf of the Committee on State Bar Organization, Chairman Clarence N. Goodwin of Chicago read a report, which told of extraordinary interest in this topic in a number of states.

Chairman Goodwin drafted a model act, which provides for recognition of the Bar as a body politic. The bill provides representative government for the Bar with an equal voice in the election of representatives by every person entitled to practice law. Government is vested in a board or council representative of the various sections of the state. This board is given large powers, especially in the field of enforcement of professional ethics and discipline. The members of it are elected by mail, so that it is not necessary for the individual lawyer to be at a particular place at a particular time in order to exercise influence in the affairs of his profession.

The present condition was described in the report as follows:

The old Russian régime was once characterized as a despotism tempered by assassination. The condition which exists in the Bar is one of anarchy modified by spasmodic and sporadic activities of various bar associations having no authority over the greater part of the Bar, and effective only through tedious, cumbersome and expensive proceedings in court.

The Ohio State Bar Association, the Florida Bar Association, and the Michigan State Bar Association drafted through their committees bills very similar to the model bill, and had them introduced in their respective legislatures. While none of these bills was passed, there is excellent prospect that they will be enacted at the next legislative sessions.

In North Dakota a bill was passed, which, though very brief, accomplished all that is required, providing that all of the lawyers of the state shall constitute the State Bar Association, and adopt such by-laws as may appear advisable. The lawyers of North Dakota are now paying an annual license fee of $15.00. The bill provides of this amount $3.00 from each member shall pass into a special fund to be expended by the Bar Association in the furtherance of its work.

Mr. Justice Bronson, of the Supreme Court of North Dakota, representing the North Dakota Bar Association, was hailed as the delegate from the first state association which is one-hundred per cent organized.

In a number of other states, the subject has been presented at state association meetings, and committees have been appointed to recommend drafts. Among these states are Kansas, Nebraska, North Carolina, Kentucky, California, Idaho, Wyoming, and New Mexico.

In concluding the Committee Report says:

Obviously the interests of the state and public require that, in matters of legal advice of whatever character, the public be protected from unqualified lay agencies, as well as from the activities of incompetent or unscrupulous members of the Bar.

We cannot, however, expect the public to sympathize with this view until membership in the Bar carries with it a guarantee of honesty and efficiency and it is equally evident that we cannot expect the profession to continue to be attractive to the best educated and most ambitious of our young men unless membership in the Bar is made a badge of honor and admits him to a field of practice in which he is not required to compete with lay agencies and unscrupulous practitioners.

For these reasons your committee is convinced that the matter most important to the future of the Bar is a practical carrying out of the recommendation of your Conference in favor of legislative action in the several states, recognizing the Bar of the state as a body politic and giving it power to govern itself, both in the matter of admission and discipline.

ROLL-CALL.

With so many delegates present the roll-call of state and local associations covered a considerable part of two sessions. There was a general feeling, however, that the time was well spent, for the reports made presented a complete survey of the progress in the profession throughout the entire country.

It was made clearly manifest that the Bar is showing greater activity in the fields of professional effort than ever before. It was evident also that the resolutions submitted at previous meetings of the Council have had marked effect in many localities, especially in the matter of curbing unlawful practice of the law, and in the encouragement of legal aid work.

It is evident, also, that participating in the nominating and electing of judges has been more general of late, and that in a number of states a great deal of good has been accomplished.

Probably half of the delegates who spoke referred to the maintenance of professional standards and the discipline of unworthy

members. One of the Tennessee delegates told how an unfit judge had been ousted through impeachment as the result of a Bar investigation.

Mr. W. H. Washington, of Nashville, gave a fine instance of Bar association activity. The legislature in 1919 appropriated $2,000,000 to erect a war memorial near the Capitol. It was decided, after due consideration, to erect a great library, in which will be placed a complete working law library with the finest facilities for its use by judges of the Supreme Court and by the Bar.

Mr. John R. Harding, of Newark, N. J., said that the New Jersey State Association had, during the past year, assumed the Legal Aid Society's work, and was helping it both financially and through a committee of young men, so that the poor may have the assistance of competent lawyers without danger of being imposed upon.

The Hudson County Bar Association of New Jersey also reported giving assistance to the Legal Aid Society.

Mr. J. Harvey Price, of Knoxville, speaking for the Tennessee State Bar Association, told how the Law Department of the State University had instituted "extension work" throughout the state in the improvement of the quality of citizenship. The speaker suggested that bar associations generally should engage in work of this sort, not merely for the sake of Americanizing foreign-born voters, but for the much larger purpose of giving information to all the voters on important legislative matters and constitutional amendments.

The Association of the Bar of New York City, through its Delegate William M. Chadbourne, reported an interesting innovation. A committee arranged to have a series of lectures delivered to members by lawyers, who are leaders in their respective fields. About 20 lectures were given during the past winter and were attended by members and their law clerks. These lectures undoubtedly constitute a notable contribution to the education of the lawyer, which must continue as long as he remains in practice.

Delegates from St. Louis, Kansas City, Chicago, Detroit and New York were able to report very significant work in respect to securing better judges.

CHICAGO BAR ASSOCIATION TRIUMPH.

The subject up for discussion in the afternoon session was the duty and responsibility of the Bar in the selection of the judiciary. Mr. William D. Guthrie, of New York, unable to be present, submitted his address, which was ordered to be printed. In this address Mr. Guthrie explains how it was that the New York legislature this year repealed the law which for 10 years had provided for direct primaries for the nomination of Justices of the Court of Appeals and of the Supreme Court.

Mr. Amos C. Miller, of Chicago, was present to tell about the great victory of the Chicago Bar Association on June 6, 1921, when all the judges of the Circuit Court, 20 in number, approved by the Association, were elected in the greatest judicial election contest ever fought in this country.

A faction of the Republican party, known as the City Hall crowd, had steadily increased its power in the state and city, until it controlled practically every office except in the courts. Plans were laid to compel the 20 judges of the Circuit Court, whose terms all expired at one time, to recognize the control of this gang or to retire to private life. It was understood that if this plan was successful it would enable the dominant faction to have its supporters appointed to the Board of Jury Commissioners and so control the administration of the law both civilly and criminally.

The Chicago Bar Association looked upon this prospect as completely demoralizing to the Bench of Cook County. Through its committee it arranged for a fusion judicial ticket, to be supported by the Democrats and by the Republican minority. The chance for success appeared exceedingly small, because the vote at a special judicial election is always light and the dominant organization is able to bring to the polls enough of its supporters to control the situation. Ordinarily 20 per cent of the voters can swing a judicial election.

The work of the Bar Association Committee, of which Mr. Miller was Chairman, consisted then of pointing out to the people the peril their judges were in, and inducing them to rally on election day. This committee spent about $75,000, contributed mostly by lawyers, using the money mainly in sending circular letters to voters.