of some judges, and a committee was appointed, of which Mr. Justice Benedict was Chairman. Unfortunately, Mr. Justice Benedict is ill and unable to present his report to-day, but his report was presented to a meeting of Judges this morning and was approved by them, and, in behalf of Justice Benedict and his Committee, and also. of the Judges, I was requested to present this report and also to present with it, as the sense of the Judges who met this morning, this resolution. The resolution is:

Resolved, That the report of the Committee of Judges for the formation of a judicial section of the Association be received and placed on file, and that the Executive Committee of the New York State Bar Association be directed to take such steps as will place upon a permanent basis the judicial section of the Association, and to confer with the sub-committee of Judges appointed for that purpose.

REPORT OF COMMITTEE OF JUDGES FOR THE FORMATION OF A JUDICIAL SECTION OF THE NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION, AT THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE ASSOCIATION, JANUARY 19, 1924

To the New York State Bar Association:

At the annual meeting of the New York State Bar Association held on January 20, 1923, the following resolution was unanimously adopted:

"Resolved, That it is the opinion of this Association that a judicial section of this Association should be formed, along the general lines of the Judicial Section of the American Bar Association, to be composed of the Judges and Justices of the Courts of Record of State-wide jurisdiction, the County Judges and Surrogates, and any other Judges of Courts of Record whom they may desire to invite after they are members of this Association;

"Resolved, That the Judges and Justices now present are respectfully requested to meet this afternoon and form a tentative organization, and the Executive Committee of the State Bar Association is directed to confer with the representatives of the tentative organization of the Judicial Section, to the end that such an amendment.

of the by-laws shall be made as is required for the formation and creation of the Judicial Section."

Pursuant to this resolution, a meeting of the Judges in attendance was held at the house of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, on Saturday, January 20th, 1923. There were present at said meeting five Justices of the Supreme Court, two Judges of the Court of General Sessions of the County of New York, one Justice of the City Court of the City of New York, and one County Judge.

Mr. Justice Benedict of the Supreme Court, Second Judicial District, was elected Chairman of the meeting and Mr. Justice Edward B. LaFetra of the City Court of the City of New York was elected Secretary.

After discussion, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted :

"That this committee recommends, That all Judges, as well as ex-Judges, of all courts of record of this State, who are members of this Association, be eligible to membership to this committee. That in its formative stages the active committee shall consist of the following members:

From the first judicial district, three Judges of the Supreme Court, one Surrogate, one Judge of the Court of General Sessions, one Justice of the City Court of the City of New York, one Judge of the Municipal Court of the City of New York.

From the second judicial district, three Judges of the Supreme Court, one Surrogate and one Judge of a County Court.

From each of the other judicial districts, one Judge of the Supreme Court, one Judge of a County Court and one Surrogate."

The Chairman was, also, authorized to appoint a sub-committee of five of whom the Chairman should be one, to confer with the Executive Committee of the Association, and Justices Davis, Seegar, McCann, Judge Rosalsky, and Justice Benedict were named as the Committee.

The Secretary was authorized to communicate with the Secretary of the Association and inform him of the action. taken.

A copy of the minutes of this meeting was accordingly sent to the Secretary of the Association.

The Executive Committee has taken no actiono for the amendment of the by-laws, so as to create a judicial section, and consequently no further steps have been taken by the sub-committee.

For the reasons stated in open meeting of the Association on January 20th, 1923, it seemed to be the consensus of opinion of all members then present, after listening to the brief statements of the Judges who were then asked for an expression of opinion, that it would be greatly to the advantage of the Association to create a judicial section of the State Bar Association. Such a section would naturally have the effect of bringing judges and lawyers who are members of the Association together at least once a year in a manner not usual in the relations between them in the ordinary work of the profession. It does not, however, depend alone on the wish and voluntary action of the Judges; it must depend on the action of the Association in the creation of a recognized judicial section or branch.

It is therefore recommended that the Committee be continued and that the Association advise the Executive Committee to take such action as will establish the proposed judicial section. upon a permanent basis.

The provisions of the Constitution and By-Laws of the American Bar Association applicable to the judicial section of that organization are respectfully suggested as models for the formation of a judicial section of the New York State Bar Association.

You have heard the resolution, Gentlemen, moved and seconded, are you ready for the question?

Those in favor of the adoption of the resolution will please say Aye; contrary minded, No.. The resolution is adopted.

The next in the order of business is a paper by Mr. Louis Marshall, The Obligations of Citizenship. (Applause.)

THE OBLIGATIONS OF CITIZENSHIP.

Mr. Louis Marshall:

Mr. President and Members of the Association: A year ago our honored associate, Judge Clearwater, read a carefully prepared paper before this body, which he entitled "The Undervaluation of American Citizenship." It seemed to some of those in attendance that it dealt principally with a criticism of certain classes of immigration and attributed what was called "a degeneration in the character of our citizenship" to such immigration. He disclaimed opposition to immigration in general and the purpose of making an appeal for race discrimination. Those who know him, as I do, as a distinguished leader of our Bar and as a man who possesses every attribute of good citizenship, regarded such disclaimer on his part as superfluous. Nevertheless, a careful reperusal of his remarks leaves the impression that his views have been colored by the writings of several authors whom he has quoted and who are recognized as stimulators of a movement not only for immigration restriction, but for the policy of an absolute prohibition of immigration.

Immediately after the submission of his paper, I commented on what I regarded to be a series of erroneous conclusions, and requested the opportunity to present an answer in which, while supporting Judge Clearwater's thesis that there existed an undervaluation of American citizenship, not only on the part of immigrants, but by native-born citizens, I would attempt to show that the real cause for such a phenomenon had not been presented. It will be my effort now to justify what I then said, first calling attention to a series of historical facts relating to immigration which are of vital significance.

This entire continent has been peopled by immigrants. This is true, even of the aborigines. At the time of the discovery. North and South America were but sparsely populated. With the exception of the germs of a civilization among the Aztecs and the inhabitants of Peru, there had been but little progress even in agriculture and industry. The discoverers came from Spain, Portugal, Italy, France, Holland and England, and for practically two and one-half centuries the growth of the col

onies establish by these different nationalities was slow. The pioneers were adventurers, in some instances exiles, or those who found it difficult to thrive in their native lands. They were generally plain, common people, who did not belong to what were then known as the better classes. They were obliged to struggle for an existence against the vicissitudes of climate and the hostility of the original owners of the soil, who gradually receded into the remote parts of the country as immigration increased. Many of them were of a strongly religious temperament and guided their lives by the Bible, and, it may be said, largely by the Old Testament, and by the traditions which grew around it, and such government as they established was to a considerable extent grounded on these concepts.

At the time of the Revolutionary War the population of the Thirteen Colonies represented a variety of racial stocks and of adherents to varying religious beliefs, and among those who helped to win the conflict are to be found the names not only of men of English birth and descent, but those of Irish, Scotch, Polish, German and Jewish origin. The fundamental ideas contained in the Federal Constitution were not only influenced by the Puritans, but were derived from the eighteenth century philosophers of France, and especially from the writings of Montesquieu and Rousseau and their contem poraries. Without the slightest desire to minimize the importance of the Anglo-Saxon contribution, it would be equally unjust to deny to men who were not of Anglo-Saxon blood their share in the shaping of our republic. When Washington entered upon the presidency, the total population of the United States, as then constituted, amounted approximately to four millions, of which a considerable portion was derived from ancestors who had come to the Atlantic seaboard during that century. It is idle, therefore, to compare this country with nations whose roots go back five or ten centuries or

It was contemplated from the beginning of our Government that immigration would be desirable. One of the grievances set forth in the Declaration of Independence against the then King of Great Britain was: He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states for the purpose obstructing the laws for the naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to enourage their migrations hither. The Con