REPRESENTATIVES, HOUSE OF. Hearing before Committee on Judiciary in Relation to H. R. 21455, H. R. 14552; H. R. 21455, Bill to Establish U. S. Court of Patent Appeals, etc.; H. R. 14552, to Regulate Judicial Procedure, etc. (as to Writs of Error and Appeals). H. R. 24145, to Regulate Judicial Procedure of the Courts of the United States. Bills S. 3749 & S. 4029, relating to Procedure in United States Courts. RIDDELL, W. R. Administration of Justice: Ill. St. Bar Assn. (1914) 353. American Courts as a Canadian Sees Them: 18 Iowa St. Bar Assn. (1912) 126. RODENBECK, A. J. Reform of Procedure in the Courts of the State of New York: N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1911) 354. ROOT, ELIHU. Reform of Procedure: 34 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1911) 87; Addresses on Government and Citizenship, p. 431. On Ending the Scandal of the Law's Delays: Addresses on Government and Citizenship, 177. Courts of Justice for Small Causes: Addresses on Government and Citizenship, 185. Reforms in Judicial Procedure: Addresses on Government and Citizenship, 467. The Layman's Criticism of the Lawyer: 26 Green Bag, 471: 39 Rep. Am. Bar Assn. 336 (1914). ROSENBAUM, samuel. The Rule-making Authority: 63 Univ. Pa. Law Rev., 151, 273, 380, 505. Rule-making in the Courts of the (British) Empire: Journ. of the Society of Comparative Legislation, N. S. No. 33, p. 128. The Rule Committee and Its Work: 40 Law Mag. & Rev., 5th Series, 129. The (English) County Courts: 64 Univ. Pa. Law Rev., 357, 472, 583. Chancery Chambers in England Today: 11 Ill. Law Rev. 29. Election of Judges, or Selection: 9 Ill. Law Rev., 489 (1915). Rule-Making in the (English) County Courts: 31 Law Quarterly Review, 304. SANBORN, J. B. Practice and Procedure in Wisconsin: 35 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 1038. SHELTON, T. W. Fixed Interstate Judicial Relations: Minn. St. Bar. Assn. (1914) 23. The Reform of Judicial Procedure: 1 Va. Law Rev. (1913), 89. Uniformity of Judicial Procedure and Decision: 22 Law Student's Helper, 5. The Relation of Judicial Procedure to Government: 18 Case and Comment 654. A New Era of Judicial Relations: N. Car. St. Bar Assn. (1916), not yet published. Procedural Principles: Minn. St. Bar Assn. (1914) 23. Simplification of Legal Procedure-Expediency Must Not Sacrifice Principle: 71 Cent. L. Journ. 330. SIMS, HENRY UPSON. The Problem of Reforming Judicial Administration in America: 3 Va. Law Rev. 622. SKINNER, T. K. Epitome of the Code of Civil Procedure of Missouri: 35 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 906. SMITH, A. W. Georgia Practice and Legal Procedure: 35 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 844. SNOW, THOMAS. Rev. 256. The Waste of Judicial Power: 7 Law Quart. The Reform of Judicial Administration: 8 Law Quart. Rev. 129. STOREY, MOORFIELD. The Reform of Legal Procedure (1911). The True Position of the Judge: (Address before the Indianapolis Bar Association) published by the Association [n. p. n. d.]. STRONG, R. C. Practice and Procedure in North Carolina: 35 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 950. SUNDERLAND, E. R. The Michigan Judicature Act of 1915: 14 Mich. Law Rev. 273, 383, 441. The Inefficiency of the American Jury: 13 Mich. Law Rev. 302. TAFT, W. H. Administration of Justice-Its Speeding and Cheapening: 72 Cent. Law Journ. 191; Va. St. Bar Assn. (1908) 233. The Delays of the Law: 18 Yale Law Journ., 28; 70 Albany Law Journ., 300. The Selection and Tenure of Judges: 38 Rep. Am. Bar Assn. (1913) 418. TENNEY, H. K. 431. Procedural Reform: Ill. St. Bar Assn. (1912) p. THAYER, E. R. Judicial Administration: 63 Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 585. THOMAS, C. S. Remarks: Colo. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 171. UNITED STATES. Message of President of, to Houses of Congress at Beginning of Third Session of Sixty-first Congress: Gov't Printing Office, 1910. VANCE, W. R. Legal Reforms in Perspective: Mo. St. Bar Assn. (1913) 239. WELLS, FRANK. (1914). Justice and Procedure: Okla. St. Bar Assn. WERNER, PERCY. Voluntary Tribunals; a Democratic Ideal for the Adjudication of Private Differences which Give Rise to Civil Actions: Mo. St. Bar Assn. (1914); Kansas City Bar Monthly, June 1914. WHEELER, E. P. American Bar Association's Recommendations as to Judicial Procedure: 32 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1909), 32. Procedure on Appeal: 35 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 354. Reform of Judicial Procedure: Chicago City Club Bull., vol. 2, No. 34 (1909), 405. Reform of Procedure in the Courts of New York: 35 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 347. Reform in Legal Procedure from the Practitioner's StandpointA Review of the New Jersey Act of 1912: 75 Cent. Law Journ. 144. Procedural Reform: 18 Case and Comment 661. WHIPPLE, SHERMAN L. The Duty of Disclosure: Address before Fla. St. Bar Assn. 1913. The Impairment of Popular Confidence in the Administration of Justice: Conn. St. Bar Assn. (1914) 62. WHITE, E. J. Reform of Judicial Procedure: Mo. St. Bar Assn. (1914) 55. WHITTIER, C. B. Judge Gilbert and Illinois Pleading Reform: 4 Ill. Law Rev. 174. WIGMORE, JOHN H. The Qualities of Current Judicial Decisions: 9 Ill. Law Rev. 529, March 1915. WILSON, C. R. Brief Statement of the Law of Pleading and Practice in the District of Columbia: 35 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 834. WINCH, L. H. Ohio Code of Civil Procedure: 35 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 983. WINSLOW, J. B. Enforcement of Law: 'One Way to Make it Better: Ill. St. Bar Assn. (1914) 383. "An Understanding Heart." Does the American Judge Possess It?: The Survey, Oct. 4, 1913. The Problem of Nonpartisan Judicial Reform: Kan. St. Bar Assn. (1914) 41. WINSTON, R. w. Popular Discontent with the Courts: N. Car. St. Bar Assn. (1913) 25. WISCONSIN. Report of Joint Committee of the Legislature of Wisconsin on Investigation of the Organization and System of Courts in Wisconsin. Madison, 1915. WOODS, C. H. Practice and Procedure in Oklahoma: 35 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 988. YOUNG, C. B. Practice and Procedure in Vermont: 35 N. Y. St. Bar Assn. (1912) 1011. SOME OBSERVATIONS UPON THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE PHI DELTA PHI WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE TYPICAL JUDICIARY ARTICLE FOR A CONSTITUTION BY CHARLES A. BOSTON, Chairman of the Committee of Professional Ethics of the New York County Lawyers' Association, New York City. The Committee has extended to me the esteemed privilege of making some discursive observations upon its recommendations, especially with reference to its proposed constitutional article. THE LAWYER'S ATTITUDE TOWARD THE CONVENTIONS OF HIS PROFESSION The New Republic, in commenting recently upon a distinguished lawyer, said: "Nor did Mr. have that kind of intellectual curiosity which gives a lawyer a critical attitude toward the conventions of his profession." The truth is that this is almost a universal failing of the legal profession: the conventions of the profession too often permit and promote an attitude of tolerance for iniquities under the guise of law, which enthral the community and defeat the litigant unjustly. Another truth is that in many of its features the law as administered defeats the achievement of just results, through its unnecessary formalism and its unnecessary adherence to ancient and outworn conventions, the most of them the result in one shape or another, of ancient methods of thought among lawyers,-lawyers elevated to judicial position, or lawyers acting as or for legislators. In these aspects this law is an inadequate instrument, not adapted to the needs of a modern civilized community with progressive aspirations. Laymen cannot be expected to remodel law, but they justly criticize many of its features; and they justly censure the legal profession for not using its knowledge and its influence to remodel laws to accomplish just results in operation. It may not be the duty of the legal profession as such to conceive the iniquity of law or to work for its improvement; but it is its opportunity to do so, and on the other hand, it can lend its influence to perpetuate unjust methods or unjust institutions in the administration of public justice through the courts. My observation leads me to the belief that existing laws fail to accomplish just results through the survival and enforcement in the courts of formal laws or formal rules without due regard to the purpose for which they were devised, or through the survival and enforcement of laws not adapted to present-day views of justice. By way of general indictment but without specifications, I should say that those elements of law which contribute most largely to produce unjust or discouraging results are: a technical and elaborate practice, technically pursued; an antiquated and unreasonable system of evidence which is so administered as often to exclude the very best attainable evidence of a fact, which is accepted as such evidence everywhere outside of a court room by reasonable men; and a tenacious and idolatrous adherence to a civil jury as an agency in determining litigated matters. Lawyers cling to these institutions fanatically in the most cases without even an inquiry in their own minds as to whether the machine of which they are a part performs well the civic duty that is its sole justification for being. THE AWAKENING OF BODIES OF LAWYERS It is most pleasing, therefore, to note that at present throughout the country lawyers, in various associated forms, are appreciating the justice of popular dissatisfaction and are themselves applying their experience and their intelligence to meeting a real public need. WHAT IS WRONG WITH LAW AND LAWYERS? In endeavoring to formulate in my own mind the relations in which existing law as administered seems to me to fall short, I have thought that the failings and their remedies in law reform could be effectually discussed in the four categories: law and injustice, law and trickery, law and absurdity, the game of evidence. Wherever the application of law systematically produces injustice, or promotes trickery in its administration, or perpetuates inherent absurdity, and wherever the admissibility of evidence becomes itself a game apart from the conscientious endeavor to ascertain the truth of a |