the more readily comprehend his case and its law. In other words, to understand the science of pleading is very largely to understand the common law. If one can correctly state his cause of action or his defense in the terms of pleading as they are known at the common law, he will not likely fall into error as to the legal aspect of his case. It is doubtful whether any single book ever printed contains more substantive law, well stated, than the first volume of Chitty on Pleading.

A most important feature of the lawyer's composition is his ethical character. This may be made or marred very largely during his early years, those devoted to general and legal education. No greater service can be rendered by the law school than in this direction, and the greater his ability the more the young man will need this aid, or rather the more apparent will be his lack of the ethical quality. An able, well read lawyer, without integrity, is a menace, nay, a scourge to his community. Moreover, he brings the whole profession into disrepute, for most people gauge a calling by the ablest, albeit the most dishonorable member of it. It is a too common opinion that lawyers are unreliable, not to say corrupt and dishonest, and thus they fail of respect or following. A cheap, conceited demagogue will often carry more weight and influence on the most vital questions than the best lawyer, simply because lawyers generally are at a discount by reason of the record they make for themselves. It should be just the other way.

The lawyer may be the most influential and respected man in the community; and he will be, if to ability and learning he unites high character and unquestioned integrity. If he has only "a one-story intellect and a one-horse vocabulary," he will be a mere cipher, and so he will if wanting in real manhood whatever may be his acquirements. From the ranks of the profession must come the judges of the land; the judicial department of the national and state government. The lawmaker should be a person learned in the law.

Governors and presidents should be well seasoned and profound lawyers. The management of great interests is often committed to lawyers and would be more frequently if they were more fit for it. All this is open to the profession, and the law school should not be unmindful of its responsibility and its opportunity to mould the men who will so soon come to the front, and who may so largely shape and control the affairs of the republic.

Let the law school enforce more thoroughness with better methods of study and let it inspire higher ideals of professional excellence. Let it teach, in season and out, precept upon precept, never to be forgotten, that the great lawyer is the best and most useful type of citizen. One more suggestion: Many law schools seem anxious merely to increase the volume of their business, and they turn out graduates as a packing-house turns out bacon and tinned meats, thinking more of quantity than quality.

Too many inducements are held forth and too many young men are led to think they can make lawyers, though neither they nor their friends have any idea they could succeed at anything else. In short access to the Bar is too easy. The profession is overcrowded, the lawyer and his work are cheapened and discredited. When the profession is assailed because so many of its members are unworthy, what defense can the law schools or the boards of examiners interpose for the part they have taken in advancing to the Bar men who, by their lack of learning or character, are unfit for it? Let us have fewer and better lawyers; at least, let them be better. It is conceded that the standard has been considerably elevated, but there is room for more improvement. It is within the power of the law schools and the examiners to bring this about. Radical measures that might seem revolutionary are not advisable, but there should be a steady, persistent and judicious effort in the direction indicated.

We know very well, but do not always realize the enormous loss to clients and to the public generally from delay and

miscarriage in the administration of justice, due very often to incompetence or misconduct of lawyers, and (let it be admitted) the weakness, hesitation and inefficiency of judges. The press, ever eager to exalt itself and to assume the general direction of affairs, constantly points to these failures in judicial proceedings, but the profession as a rule seems rather complacent and indifferent in regard to a matter so vitally affecting its standing and usefulness.

If anything foregoing is too strongly put, it will, as hoped, be excused because prompted only by a desire for higher standards. Whatever is too obvious will, of course, be ignored. If, as it seems to the writer, a three years' course should insure better equipment than the majority of graduates exhibit, there should be no false delicacy in stating the fact, nor any hesitation in applying the proper remedial treatment.

PROCEEDINGS

OF THE

SECTION OF PATENT, TRADE-MARK AND COPYRIGHT LAW.

St. Paul, Minnesota, August 29, 1906.

The Section of Patent, Trade-Mark and Copyright Law of the American Bar Association convened in the Senate Judiciary Room, Capitol Building, St. Paul, Minnesota, August 29, 1906, at 3 P. M., the Chairman, Robert S. Taylor, of Indiana, presiding.

The Secretary, Melville Church, of the District of Columbia, being absent, J. Nota McGill, of the District of Columbia, was elected Secretary pro tempore.

A letter from Mr. J. J. O'Connell, of New York, was read, but as the matter to which he referred was not before the Sec

tion, no action was taken thereon.

The Chairman:

The usages of the Section contemplate that at the opening of each meeting the Chairman of the Section shall deliver an address.

On this occasion I shall omit that duty; at least I shall omit the discharge of it in any substantial way. I would have. been very glad if it had been possible to prepare something worthy of the attention of the Section if I could do so, but circumstances were such that I was unable, from combined embarrassments in the way of ill health and business, to prepare any such paper. I have some thoughts. in my mind which I should have been glad to embody in form and present to the Section. What I would say, if I could say it in the way I should like, would be on a subject which might be defined as the relation of invention to social and political progress, a subject which is not far from the thoughts of any of us, but it

appears to me that we might not fully realize all phases of it unless we turn our attention quite closely to it.

All government is instituted to promote the happiness of mankind. The happiness of mankind is made up of the happiness of individuals. There is no such thing as social progress or prosperity that is not made up of the progress and prosperity of individuals. The happiness of individual men and women consists in the enjoyment of the good things of life, which commence with the simple supply of the simplest wants in the way of food and clothing and home; with the supply of the intellectual wants, as by books and papers, and the social wants which comprise travel and amusement. In the very able address delivered this morning to the Association, mention was made frequently of the part which science plays in modern progress and in the changes of modern life. That was quite true and well said. This is the day of scientific progress, and great blessings have come to mankind out of it. But I think that if we reflect a moment it will be apparent that it is not after all so much science as it is the application of science by invention that benefits society. It is not the sciences in the abstract, but it is science made practical and utilized for the good of man that promotes the welfare of society.

If there were time to take up the category of the elements of human happiness and consider the extent to which invention enters into the enjoyment and prosperity of mankind today, we should be surprised, I think, to find how great it is. Of course, invention in the strict sense of the word has been the accompaniment of civilization from the very oldest and simplest beginnings. The simplest plow ever used to till the soil was an invention. The simplest boat that ever rode the waters was an invention. But when we use that word we commonly apply it to the inventions which we may say extend no farther back than about one hundred years, within which time the progress of invention has far exceeded that which was made in all the preceding centuries. In the production of food and its preparation for human consumption, it will be