had passed an act authorizing the Governor (Hill) to appoint three "commissioners for the promotion of uniformity of legislation in the United States," to examine the subjects of Marriage and Divorce, Insolvency, Form of Notarial Certificates, and other subjects; to ascertain the best means to effect an assimilation and uniformity among the laws of the states, and to consider whether it would be wise and practicable for the State of New York to invite the other states of the Union to send representatives to a convention; to draft laws to be submitted for the approval and adoption of the several States, and to advise and recommend such other course of action as shall best accomplish the purpose of the act.

The committee recommended the passage by each State and Territory and by the Congress of the United States, of an act similar to that cited, suggesting as further subjects for consideration, "Descent and Distribution of Property, Acknowledgments of Deeds, Execution and Probate of Wills.”15 This Committee on Uniform State Laws of the American Bar Association has reported annually since that time, but beginning with the First (National) Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws at Saratoga Springs, New York, in 1892, the work has been done by the commissioners, their results being presented to the American Bar Association for its endorsement through this committee. The annual National Conference of the Commissioners has always been held each year just preceding the meeting of the American Bar Association.

This connection with the American Bar Association has given to the work of the National Conference the great weight of

(14) For a copy of the bill and suggestions in support of the same, see Proceedings, National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, 1915, page 51.

(15) See address Nathan William MacChesney, Uniform Laws, National Assn. Real Estate Exchange, July 19, 1911 (supra).

the influence of the American Bar Association in furthering the cause of uniformity of law, but in some respects the companionship has tended to make the work of the National Conference itself less well known, as it has been overshadowed by the larger and better known organization, and though acting under an official authority of the respective State Governments, and therefore an official legislative body, it has often been thought of by the general public, and even by many intelligent lawyers as a branch or committee of the American Bar Association.16

The importance of this movement, or of the body itself, in view of the needs of this country, can hardly be overstated, and the National Conference and the work it is doing is entitled to much more recognition and credit than it has heretofore received, either by the general public, by publicists, or by the Bar. The Bench, I am happy to say, has already shown a keen appreciation of the work which is being done. An interesting editorial in the Green Bag some time ago1 stated:

"The conference has come to exercise a function of great importance in molding the legislation of the several States, and should be consulted by the State legislatures for advice on important projects of State legislation, and aided with suggestions from other sources in its work of shaping new uniform acts."

It is the most efficient legislative drafting body in the land to lay hold of the many new undertakings of tremendous importance constantly facing the legislatures of the respective States.

The work is the most juristic work undertaken in the United States since the adoption of the Federal Constitution, and

(16) For a discussion of the undesirable effect of this, see article by Lewis N. Dembitz, "Uniformity of State Laws," North American Review, January, 1899, Vol. 168, page 84.

(17) Editorial, Green Bag, December, 1911.

the significance of it will be realized when attention is called to the fact that since the debates resulting in the Constitution of the United States, it is the first time that the official representatives of the several States have gotten together in legislative assembly to discuss any legal question from a national point of view with particular reference to the needs of the respective States from which they come.18

Its Scope and Methods-As has already been pointed out, the plan upon which the National Conference has worked has been rather to embody the existing law in the form of a statute upon the subjects treated than to introduce any novel principles.19 Occasionally this rule has been departed from, yielding to what was believed to be the concensus of opinion in the business world, as for instance, with the object of giving full negotiability to all documents of title, including warehouse receipts, defining value, etc.20 The Conference has been extremely careful not to trespass upon the exclusive territory of the legislatures by unusual laws on new subjects or entirely new laws on old subjects. Its intention is not to take up every worthy subject for a draft of a uniform law, but to take up only those subjects in which uniformity of law is per se the desirable thing. Professor John H. Wigmore has grouped these subjects into three classes:

First. Laws affecting transactions which commonly concern parties or things in different states and hence lead to confusion and uncertainty unless they are uniform. Under this head belong the

(18) See article by F. J. Stimson, Annals of Amer. Academy, May, 1895, Volume V, page 829. (19) The Conference has sometimes been criticized both as to the character of its work and as to the methods pursued, and has recently created a Committee on Scope and Program to make a continued study of the field, scope and methods of work of the Conference, and to report its conclusion each year to that body.

(20) See article Walter George Smith, "The Outlook for Uniformity of Legislation." Green Bag, Dec., 1911, Vol. 23, p. 619.

subjects of Negotiable Instruments and Bills of Lading.

Second. Laws affecting kinds of business having an interstate trade, in which a State passing a reform law will be at a disadvantage unless the adjoining States pass similar laws, and as to which State legislatures are not willing to pass such laws unless there is some prospect of a uniform law. In this class belong the Child Labor Laws, Convict Labor Laws and Incorporation Laws.

Third.

Laws concerning classes of transactions which several States have already regulated by some legislative reform which other States now desire to regulate by whichever, if any, of existing measures is most efficient. In such a situation, the need arises for a study of the various measures passed and proposed by some impartial body which can choose among them and combine them, and recommend the resulting preferable and improved measure. The Workmen's Compensation Act, Occupational Diseases and Sickness Laws are good examples of this class.21

Perhaps the ideals, scope and methods of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws could not be better expressed than by the statement by Mr. Tompkins on the Scope of Uniform Legislation, in which he says:22

"Uniformity of laws is not needed on all subjects. Though modern invention and discovery have done so much to bring the people of this great country together and make those residing in distant States near neighbors in the large majority of matters that affect the daily life of the citizens, it is not only not necessary that there should be uniformity in the laws of the several States regulating and controlling them, but on the contrary such uniformity is unde

(21) Paper on Uniform State Laws read before the Social Science Association by Robbins B. Anderson, October 4, 1915, and re-printed in Sunday Advertiser, October 17, 1915, page 5.

(22) Henry C. Tompkins, "Necessity for Uniformity in the Laws Governing Commercial Paper." 13 Reports American Bar Association, 247.

sirable and absolutely impracticable. There is and will continue to be a difference in the character and surroundings of the people residing in different portions of the Union that will require a difference in the law governing them, but while this is so, it is equally true that the laws governing those matters in which the people of the different States are equally interestedthose matters which arise daily in their business intercourse with one another— should be uniform so that the citizen of one State may know the exact character of his act and contract, the full extent of his liability attaching to it, without regard to the locality in which the act is done or the contract made, and without regard to the tribunal which passes on it."

The difficulties of bringing this about are recognized, but the need for it must be conceded. Much has already been done to accomplish it and with the hearty, earnest, intelligent and effective co-operation of the Bar, the movement can be given an impetus which will enable it to realize a large part of its program in the very near future.

The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws has a well defined system which results in the thorough discussion of the need for a particular act; of the law in the various States, and of the form of a particular act under consideration. A resolution is introduced providing for the appointment of a committee to report upon the advisability of taking up a specific topic. The committee then makes a report to the Conference, sometimes with a prelimi

nary draft of the bill attached. The committee is usually assisted by an expert draftsman, who has a comprehensive knowledge of the present law on the subject, including the decisions of this country and abroad, as well as a knowledge of the history of the principles and doctrines concerned. Under the direction of the committee he prepares a draft, which is sent to the commissioners as the first tentative draft. It is then discussed at the next annual meeting, section by sec

tion. It is then recommitted, and there have usually been three or four tentative drafts before the vote is taken on final adoption. This vote is always taken by States, and though the meeting held in St. Louis in August, 1920, was the thirtieth annual meeting, few acts have received final sanction which have not received the unanimous votes of all the States represented, one of the few exceptions being that approved last year known as the Uniform Land Registration Act, with reference to what is known popularly as the Torrens' System of Land Registration.

The Conference has recently, in order to get the highest degree of efficiency in connection with its work, created a Committee on Legislative Drafting, of which Professor Freund, of the University of Chicago, and Secretary of the Illinois Commission on Uniform State Laws, is chairman, and who is undoubtedly the best qualified man for this position to be found in the United States. This committee has called attention to the need of classified knowledge for intelligent legislation. And later recommended at the next annual Conference the preparation of a Manual of Style to be followed in the drafting of uniform laws, a subject to which the American Bar Association has already given some attention.25 It has also been suggested that the committee should take up the matter of draft

24

ing uniform clauses in acts as part of

(23) The adoption of the "Torrens Act" was by a divided vote of the Conference after what many of the members thought was an insufficient consideration, and resulted in the passage of a by-law, which will hereafter require the printing of amendments, and the withholding of final passage of the Act until at least a year following the year at which it has been discussed section by section. See Proceedings, National Conference of Com. on Uniform State Laws. 1915, p. 56.

(24) See Proceedings, National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, 1915, page 213.

(25) See Reports American Bar Association for 1914.

its work, and it is to be hoped that this will be undertaken. With reference to the need for this work, the committee in its last report has said:

"Unfortunately, there is no book written in the English language discussing, in the light of administrative and judicial experience, the legal ways and means by which a given legislative policy can best be rendered effective, or the arrangements and institutions which at present serve that end. The reason for this must be found in the large commercial demand for legal works available for the business of litigation. which has absorbed the attention of jurists to the utter neglect of scholarly or literary service to the no less important business of legislation.

"The lawyer's treatment of the law is analytical, the legislator's constructive. To the lawyer it is a fixed quantity to which he must adjust himself, to the legislator a potential force which he may fashion for his purpose. Obviously, the two points of view are entirely different. The material that the lawyer needs has been collected and digested with a degree of completeness that leaves hardly anything to be desired. But while the legal material that the legislature needs, the history of statutes and of their construction by the courts, may also be found, to a considerable extent at least, scattered through the law reports, there is no key to it through digests or treatises adapted to his purposes."28

I do not need to say that to achieve this result requires conscientious, scientific, painstaking work of a high order, and of the most exacting character. It has been my pleasure to be a member of the National Conference, as one of the Illinois Commissioners, for a number of years, and I have never been associated with a body of men with a wider knowledge of their subjects, or who give more careful or conscientious attention to them than

(26) Illinois, in common with certain other progressive States, has created a Legislative Reference Bureau, located at Springfield. This Bureau, with Finley F. Bell as Secretary, is doing good work, and the Bar of the State should take pains to become familiar with it. See Appendix "F" for list of compilation so far prepared.

the Commissioners on Uniform State Laws from the respective States. They form an ideal legislative body, the equal of which I do not believe exists in this country, and their work may be justly compared to that of the public commissions abroad, to which so much praise is justly given, but the best work of which is equalled and in some instances surpassed by the work of our own National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws.

In closing my general discussion upon the history, importance and methods of the work of this great organization, in order to show you that this is not a mere personal prejudice in its favor, may I quote to you the words of that distinguished scholar, Professor Samuel Williston of Harvard University, who in speaking of certain of the uniform acts prepared by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws

said:27

"Great as are the evils of the conflict of authority in the United States, due to the numerous independent jurisdictions, this conflict has given to the American Commercial Acts (which have been based on the English models) a distinct superiority to them. In England, whatever is once finally judicially decided becomes the law, and no matter though the decision may be inharmonious with general principles, the codifier is bound to accept the result. In the United States the decisions of no single State are taken as the model. The draftsman is not primarily seeking to reform the law, but in attempting to weld a uniform and coherent whole from decisions of fifty States, he necessarily discards local decisions which are inharmonious with the general principles of his subject; * * * Moreover, the American statutes have probably had a longer and more thorough examination by a greater

(27) Samuel Williston, "The Uniform Partnership Act, with Some Remarks on Other Uniform State Laws," Address, Law Association of Philadelphia, December 18, 1914.