evidence that the applicant is a man of correct and regular habits, of capacity, of earnest purpose and of perseverance. The concern of the State is to so regulate admission to the Bar that none be permitted to enter but men of enlightenment and high character. Once, when it was remarked that the requirements in respect to legal education for admission to the Bar were much higher and more rigidly enforced in France than in England, and that as a general rule the young French lawyer was more learned and better prepared in this respect to enter upon the practice of his profession than the young English lawyer, it was replied with great force that the English plan was better adapted to exclude from the profession men of low character, and that the young English lawyer was more likely to be a gentleman and acquainted with men and affairs than the young French lawyer, and that, after all, this was the matter of chief importance.

Our inquiry, then, is, what requirements and regulations would constitute a sufficiently satisfactory guaranty to the State that the applicant for admission is worthy by reason of character and general intelligence to enter the noble profession of the law, and to discharge its high duties without detriment to the public?

1. First, then, we deem a liberal general education an important prerequisite for admission to the Bar. No one can doubt the liberalizing and harmonizing effect of letters upon the mind and character. The lawyer should not only have a conscience, but an enlightened conscience. He is to be the counsellor of men in all their varied affairs, and to intelligently influence public opinion, and his preparation to do all this is manifestly incomplete unless his culture and reading has been extended beyond the limits of his profession. Such a requisite would of itself exclude a large number of those against whom the doors of the profession should be barred, and make much more probable a safe and happy selection. Its importance has been very generally recognized. In England the applicant, unless he be a graduate or has passed an examination in arts at one of the universities, must pass a preliminary examination in general knowledge to test his culture, the subjects being English, writing from dictation, writing an English essay, arithmetic, geography, the history of England, Latin, and any two of the following languages: Greek, French, German, Spanish and Italian; and in France he must have ob

tained the degree of Bachelor of Letters after passing an examination in French, Latin and Greek composition, as well as in literature, history and philosophy. In Germany the law student. must be a graduate of the gymnasium-the equal of a college with us. In our country six of the States make an allowance in the term of pupilage in favor of college graduates, and in Pennsylvania and Delaware there is required a preliminary examination in Latin and in all other branches of a common high school education. For very many years in the early history of our State an allowance of one full year in the term of pupilage was made in favor of the graduate of any regular college or university. In days when a liberal education was rare, and not within the reach of the poor, to have required any high degree of general culture from the applicant would have seemed a hardship, and would have worked evil as well as good, but now that higher education is not beyond the reach of any, there could be no solid objection to such requirement, at least in this regard as exists in Pennsylvania, and the potent influence that it would exert in the direction of the formation of a learned, upright and enlightened Bar is too manifest to call for words of exposition and illustration.

2. The applicant should be required to spend at least three years in preparation under the eyes of the profession in a law school, or in a law office, so that opportunity be afforded to discover what manner of man he is, and to judge intelligently when the period of his probation expires whether he is a fit and proper person to enter our ranks. It might be proper to concede one year of the three to college graduates, but a term of three years appears to us not too long for the student to make known his character and capacity; to become fully aware of the dignity and high aims and duties of the profession; to become imbued with the tone and spirit of the Bar; to learn its ethics and to prepare himself to enter "a workman that needeth not to be ashamed " upon the practice of the law. In the early history of our State the term was four years, and so remained for a long period. In three years the idle, the incompetent, and the morally worthless would be apt to drop from the ranks and turn to more congenial pursuits, while they who persevered and gave satisfaction would be sufficiently known and tried to be admitted without apprehension.

3. The limit of age should be strenuously insisted upon. Twenty-one is even too early for admission to the Bar. Our profession is no place for babies and sucklings. Our duties and responsibilities call for men of matured minds and character, with experience of the world and knowledge of human nature, and of grave and earnest purpose. Our walks are full of snares

and pitfalls for the young and inexperienced, and only steady and wary feet should tread therein. It will be of no ultimate disadvantage to the student to be kept back until he is a full grown man mentally, morally and physically, while in the requirement of full age there is no little security to the public and the profession against unfortunate admissions. There will, of course, be exceptions, created by early maturity, uncommon talents and peculiar circumstances, and these should be provided for; but the most satisfactory evidence should be required that the proposed exception really deserves to be an exception.

4. The proof of a good moral character should be full and satisfactory. It would be well to require that the certificate of an applicant in this regard should be signed by at least a majority of the Bar of the county from which he comes. No one mode of proof should be controlling. Any specified proof may, under certain circumstances, become a cheat and a fraud. The members of the Supreme Court to whom is entrusted the judgment should have the power to disregard, when they see fit, any specified evidence, and be perfectly free to admit only on proof satisfactory to them. This is the matter of greatest concern to the public, and too much of earnest and intelligent consideration cannot be devoted to the task of making the test complete and adequate.

5. Lastly, the applicant should be required to pass satisfactorily an examination, so conducted as to be a fair and adequate test of his mastery of the course of legal study prescribed. The public and the Bar are profoundly interested in the strict and impartial enforcement of this requirement. It affords the only practical guaranty that the applicant is a man of capacity, of serious purpose, of perseverance and of good habits, and that he is prepared to enter upon the practice of law without risk to the public. Its importance is generally recognized and does not require argument. The difficulty is to fix upon provisions sufficient

to secure its faithful and efficient administration. The sympathy with the anxiety of a class of clever young fellows on the eve of an important examination, a failure at which must bring discredit and cloud the prospects in life, is so natural and powerful that in practice it is found almost impossible to guard against undue concessions and overmuch mercy on the part of the examiners. Again, it is not an easy matter to secure from examiners chosen from among busy lawyers such time and labor devoted to preparation as will render the examination fair and searching-neither too easy nor too difficult-but an intelligent and thorough test of such comprehension of the subject as may reasonably be expected from the average young man of good capacity, reading and rereading carefully and attentively text books without the means of acquiring that clear, definite and comprehensive knowledge attainable only when practice goes along with reading.

It is further found to be difficult in practice to afford to the examination, when it is conducted orally, sufficient time to make it fair and exhaustive. Experience has demonstrated the superior ity of written over oral examinations, and the latter mode should be used only to supplement the former in cases of reasonable doubt.

The following scheme would, perhaps, be found to meet all of the difficulties suggested: The graduate of the law school connected with the State University is admitted without further examination. Let the final examination at the law school cover the course prescribed by the Supreme Court, and require all ap plicants, whether students of the school or not, to pass this ex. amination. Conjoin with the professor or professors of the law school, with equal authority to take part in the preparation of the examination papers and in the conduct of the examination, three examiners selected by the Supreme Court from the Bar of the State, and holding their office for four years. Require an examination fee of all applicants, and divide the fund thus created among the examiners, the professors included, as some slight compensation for time and labor devoted and expenses incurred. Let the examination be written and each question valued, and permit no applicant to pass who does not make by correct responses at least sixty per cent. of the aggregate valuation. Re

quire each applicant to certify on honor at the close of the examination that he had had previous to their submission no intimation as to what questions would be propounded, and has received no assistance in making his answers. An examination so conducted would command sufficient time, would be fair and searching, and would secure intelligent and laborious preparation on the part of the examiners. The scheme would have the still further merit of keeping under the oversight of the Bar the State Law School, and secure against what is complained of in many States as a most serious evil, undue concessions, in order to increase the number of students. In other words, the State would have a guaranty of the continued efficiency of its law school, and the law school would secure against the examination becoming a mere form.

Such, in our judgment, are the requirements best calculated to secure what is of most importance to the public-a Bar of capacity and high character.

To undertake a discussion of the pleasing and important subject of legal education would extend this report beyond reasonable limits. It will be wisest to defer that subject to some future report.

The history of the legislation in this State pertaining to the subjects entrusted to the Committee is interesting, but for a like reason it will be best to commit its presentation likewise to the future.

The existing law in our State relating to admission to the Bar is as follows: "Any citizen of this State who has attained the full age of twenty-one years, and who may pass an examination upon the course of study prescribed by the Supreme Court, or has graduated at any recognized law school in the United States, and can produce the certificate of a practising attorney of the Supreme Court that he is of good moral character, shall be admitted to all the privileges, and shall be permitted to practice as an attorney at law in this State, on taking and subscribing the oath required by Section 30, Article II, of the Constitution, and the oath respecting duelling." It is further provided that the oaths "shall be administered in open Court, and the name of the person taking the same entered in a roll or book kept for that purpose, and a certificate of said oaths shall be filed in Court." The license to practice must be granted by the Supreme Court.