4. Have the Supreme Court consist of one Chief Justice, two Associate Justices and one Circuit Judge; each one of the nine Circuit Judges serving in his turn for one year as a member of the Supreme Court.

5. Have the Judges of Probate appointed by the Governor, with the restriction that no one not a practicing attorney shall be appointed to this high judicial office.

6. That Sections of the Code 93-99, 132 to 143, both inclusive, 177 to 189, both inclusive, 190 to 198, both inclusive, be made applicable to Trial Justices' Courts.

7. That the time for appeal from Trial Justices' Courts be extended to ten days.

8. That Petit Jurors in all cases, civil and criminal, be required to take an oath of secrecy.

9. That in the trial of civil causes, each side be authorized to challenge three jurors.

JAMES H. RION.

Y. J. POPE.

B. W. BALL.

AUGUSTINE T. SMYTHE.

Mr. W. W. Harllee said that, in view of the fact that the Report just read embodied matters and suggestions of the gravest importance, he would move that discussion upon it be deferred until the morning. His motion was seconded, and carried.

Mr. R. W. Boyd, Chairman of the Committee on Education for the Bar and Admission to the Bar, read the following Report:

To the President and Members of the South Carolina Bar Association:

The Committee on Education for the Bar and Admission to the Bar have the honor to make the following Report:

In England, and in France, the members of the Bar have very largely in their own hands the control of the matter of admission to the Bar, and the discipline of the Bar. In this country the State has control, and almost all reforms and desired changes must come through legislation. To enter into a discussion of the relative merits of the two systems would be of no

practical value. The matter of importance for us is to make the best possible of the conditions under which we live. All that we can do as a Bar Association is to seek to enlighten and influence public opinion by making clear the grave bearing of the subject upon the public weal and the best interests of society, to point out what we may conceive to be deficiencies in existing regulations, and make respectful suggestions to the Legislature in the interest of what we may deem to be desirable changes and reforms.

It would be difficult to exaggerate the importance of our profession in its relations to government and society. A great English lawyer, on a memorable occasion, said: "It is the duty and the high privilege of the Bar to furnish to justice the just weights that should be placed in her balance, by presenting all those considerations which make for or against either side of every cause; to devote itself to the defence of the feeble and the unfortunate; and on those grand occasions when the public liberties are in question, to stand forward with intrepidity and affirm the common right." Judge Sharswood, in his Professional Ethics, says that legislation and jurisprudence "are the right and left hands of government in carrying out the great purposes of society. By legislation is meant the making of law— its primary enactment and subsequent alteration. Jurisprudence is the science of what the law is and means, and its practical application to the cases as they arise. The province of legisla tion is jus dare, and of jurisprudence jus dicere. The latter is entirely in the hands of lawyers as a body, the former almost entirely." "Justice is the permanent interest of all men and of all commonwealths;" and upon its faithful administration depend the peace, content, prosperity and happiness of the people. The purest and wisest Judges, however, are powerless to secure the just administration of the laws without the co-operation of lawyers of learning and high character-of lawyers who recognize their responsibility as officers of justice, pursue their profession as something different and higher than a mere moneymaking vocation, and who regard a triumph won at the expense of justice as a ground for shame rather than for congratulation. With wise laws, able Judges, and the very best machinery for the trial of causes, it would still be in the power of a corrupt Bar to pollute justice at its fountain-head, estab

lish the wrong and defeat the right; while not unfrequently it has happened that an able, learned and courageous Bar has wrested justice from the hands of the most dishonest Judges, and stood an impregnable bulwark between the people and injustice and tyranny. Still fresh in the memory of the people is the incalculable service done by the Bar of South Carolina in the administration of justice during the gloomy years of Radical rule in this State, in the face of a corrupt government and an unreliable Bench.

Such being the influence and power of lawyers in the administration of the laws everywhere, but particularly here in South Carolina, where we have disturbed the ancient relation of power between the Bench and the Bar, and by subjecting the tenure of the judicial office to frequent tests of the popular will, and by pro hibiting Judges from charging juries in respect to facts, have enormously increased the power of the Bar, it is of supreme importance to the people that lawyers should be of learning and capacity sufficient to make judicious application of the abstract and eternal principles of right to the refinements of property and the commerce and business of the present times, and of such character that, in the quaint language of the Mirror of Justice, "they put no false dilatories into Court, nor false witnesses, nor move, or offer any false corruptive deceits, leasings or false lies, nor consent to any such, but truly maintain their client's cause so that it fail not by any negligence or default in them; nor by any threatening, hurt or villany disturb the Judge, Plaintiff, Sergeant or other in Court, whereby they hinder the right or the hearing of the cause."

All this, however, does not fill out the full measure of the power and influence of our profession. "It is, indeed, the noblest faculty of the profession to counsel the ignorant, defend the weak and oppressed, and to stand forth on all occasions as the bulwark of private rights against the assaults of power, even under the guise of law. But it has still other functions; it is its office to diffuse sound principles among the people, that they may intelligently exercise the controlling powers placed in their hands in the choice of their representatives in the Legislature, and of Judges in deciding, as they are often called upon to do, upon the most important changes in the Constitution; and, above all, in the formation of that public opinion which may be

said in these times, almost without a figure, to be the ultimate sovereign." Trained as lawyers are to analyze, and to get at the gist of every matter, and the true and real issues of every controversy, and considering also the wide range of information necessitated by their pursuits, it should not surprise that their opinions upon all subjects that engage the minds of the people should possess a well recognized superiority. It would be remarkable should an opinion concurred in by the majority of the lawyers of a State not become the prevailing and dominant opinion.

In brief, the lawyer is, as should be, "the life-guard of our fortunes; the best collateral security for our estate; the trusty pilot to steer one through the dangerous ocean of contention; a true priest of justice that neither sacrifices to fraud nor covetousness; the patron of innocence; the upholder of right; the scourge of oppression; the terror of deceit, and the oracle of his country."

Such is an inadequate presentation of the power and influence of our profession in the community. Its high functions, however, may be exercised, and its great power wielded for evil as well as for good. Mere admission to the Bar does not make one an enlightened and conscientious gentleman. The prizes of the profession tempt the unworthy as well as the worthy, and it is folly to trust the constitution of the Bar entirely to chance, and to the eclectic influences of a learned profession, doing its work in the presence of and under the free criticism of the public. It is true that there has been hitherto small ground for complaint against the Bar of our State, and it has borne an enviable reputation for learning and high character, despite the fact that there has been little or no provision for the education and training of law students, and that the requirements for admission have been of the mildest, and administered in great mercy; but we must remember that in the past the constitution of our society and the time and temper of our people tended very greatly to confine our membership to honorable and accomplished gentlemen. We have now, however, entered upon a new order of things; we live under different conditions; the same protecting social and moral influences are not around us, and serious and increasing complaints are being made against the administration of the law in our midst and against our profession. Those of us who

think most highly of the general character of the lawyers of the State, must admit that there is considerable room for improvement, and that it is high time that attention be directed to the education of law students, and to a reform in the requirements regulating their admission to the Bar. Is there always exhibited due respect to the Bench? Is the proper degree of dignity and courtesy observed in the heat of legal controversies? Is there hearty co-operation with the Bench in its efforts to preserve discipline? Are improper means in the securement of verdicts unknown among us? Is our membership free from the ignorant and the corrupt? Are there no barristers who suck only the corrupted blood of the law, "trade only in tricks and quacks, and never cure a wound but always keep it raw"? Are there among us no Bicands, "moved by the touch of certain thin leaves of the papyrus or paper tree to get up on their hind legs and utter a long discordant gabble"?

We submit that the legislative mind cannot well be directed to a subject of more importance to the people, or to one more deserving of the most earnest and thoughtful consideration.

In discussions on this subject some confusion has been created by giving too much prominence to legal education. Looked at from the proper standpoint-the interests of the people-this is subsidiary in its character, and only important as a means to the end to be obtained, to wit: the exclusion from the profession of all but men of enlightenment, honor and capacity. To the individual it is a matter of great importance that he enter the profession well prepared by reading, practice and observation to undertake the duties of a lawyer, but this is a matter of no very great concern to the State. If not well prepared, he will find that he must acquire a sufficiency of the learning of his profession, or abandon its practice. Unlike the physician, he is seldom required to act without time for preparation and consultation; and unlike the physician, he cannot conceal his ignorance. He acts in the full light of day; critical eyes are upon him, and he is confronted by an opponent whose duty it is to find out every deficiency and to mercilessly expose him. If he does not quickly complete his imperfect preparation he will do but little harm, and the profession will soon get rid of him. The State is but little concerned in the mere legal knowledge of the applicant, except in so far as the acquisition of that knowledge affords good