페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

other schools, the committee voted to notify the representatives of this school (whose standing had been challenged) that a report adverse to the school had been made and that before any recommendation was made to the Association the Executive Committee would be glad to hear anything the school had to say in explanation. In accordance with that, the representatives of the Chicago Kent College of Law appeared before the committee yesterday and again today. We have been very careful in our investigation, and we hope we have not been. unfair; we have tried not to be, but we felt compelled, after listening to what the representatives of this school said to us, to make the recommendation we presented. Of course if the Association feels that the Executive Committee has not investigated this matter as fully as we should have done, the matter may be referred back to the Executive Committee of next year; I am simply telling you that we have done the best we could to investigate this school and have felt impelled to come to the conclusion which we have reached, namely, that the school has failed to comply with the Articles of Association. In stating this I wish to say that the faculty of that school is well known to me personally. The faculty contains men of character and standing in the profession and in the city of Chicago. A number of them are judges in the courts, men of high personal character and men of ability.

[ocr errors]

Seth Shepard, of the District of Columbia: I, for one, am not willing to vote one way or the other upon a question about which I know nothing. If the standing of a member of this Association is impeached, there ought to be proof of it made. Now, if the Executive Committee have taken testimony and the testimony is reported to us in such form that we can consider it and make up our judgment upon it, I should consider that ample. But we have simply the report of the Executive Committee on the one hand, and on the other hand we have the plea "not guilty." We have every confidence in the integrity of our Executive Committee, of course. We feel sure that they made a recommendation that was supported by

evidence. Yet how can we, as members of the Association, vote to expel a member simply upon the report of the Executive Committee? It goes without saying that it is a stigma cast upon this institution. As has been said by the Chairman, some of the members of the faculty of this school are reputable gentlemen, and if this school is stricken from the roll of membership in this Association for a violation of the rules, the violation must have been deliberate, and therefore fraudulent. Now, I for one cannot vote to expel anyone, even if I had personal knowledge, except upon the regular presentation of the case. Who is the witness? What are the facts? What is the denial? That seems to me, as a lawyer, the only course that we can take.

C. T. Terry, of New York: Before the last speaker addressed us and before the President had made his very clear and lucid statement of the basis of the finding of the Executive Committee, I was on the point of taking something like the same position as the last speaker. It seems to me, however loath of course we all are to take drastic action in reference to any law school, that we must conform to the constitution of the Association that was prepared deliberately and after great thought; we must conform to it if we are to maintain our character.

Now, I cannot agree with the last speaker that this Association should call upon the Executive Committee to present the evidence upon which it acted. The duties of the Executive Committee are peculiar to that committee. If this Association attempted to do in executive session the detail work which it is the duty of the Executive Committee to perform, the cart would be put before the horse in the matter of the disposition of business. We must assume from the statement of the President not only that the Executive Committee acted upon carefully ascertained evidence, but that it acted upon information obtained elsewhere than from its agent, and that, not content with that, it, as it were, asked the law school in question to

show cause why such a recommendation as this should not be made.

Now, it does not seem to me further, and again somewhat in disagreement with the last speaker, that it is necessarily any smirch upon the character of the law school in question, and less still, to use the words of the previous speaker, does it indicate that we are taking action upon something which is fraudulent. I take it that the situation is simply this: That the law school referred to has fallen, unconsciously, we are willing to assume, below the standard fixed by our constitution; and that being the fact, and I assume that it has been competently ascertained now to be the fact by the body whose business it was to ascertain it, there remains the logical course to pursue of dropping this law school from our roll of membership. It is needless to say that we will regret the necessity of such action, but we must do it if we are to maintain our character.

Therefore, sir, I move you that the recommendation of the Executive Committee be adopted.

The motion was seconded.

Clarence H. Miller, of Texas: It seems to me that this is a pretty serious matter, serious in the aspect that it lays down a procedure by which we are to be governed hereafter. Of course it only involves this school now, but it may involve other schools. The Constitution provides as follows in the 7th article:

(Reading the 7th article of the Articles of Association.) Therefore, it is not competent, according to the Constitution, that the expulsion shall be by the Executive Committee, and for us simply to vote that the Executive Committee has acted wisely is not this meeting expelling this school, but it is the Executive Committee expelling the school.

It seems to me that if this provision of the Constitution has any force in it, no man here can vote intelligently without first having a hearing. I have not the slightest doubt that I will sustain the Executive Committee upon the evidence, but when

we have an issue raised I think it is proper and fundamental that the accused should be given an opportunity to be heard, the evidence against the accused first being presented, before we are called upon to vote. I think it will be contrary to the law and also to the spirit of our organization to permit the Executive Committee to expel any school. In saying this I do not wish to be understood as questioning the findings of the Executive Committee at all.

Seth Shepard, of the District of Columbia: Mr. President, I offer an amendment to the motion made by the gentleman from New York, viz., that this matter be referred back to the Executive Committee to be reported, together with the testimony taken by them, at our meeting next year.

Francis B. James, of Ohio: I desire to call the attention of the last speaker to article 10, which provides expressly that these matters shall be entrusted to the Executive Committee.

W. S. Curtis, of Missouri: It seems to me that this is a matter of interpretation. It is the duty of the Executive Committee to see that these requirements are fulfilled, and I believe that they have done so; they have collected the evidence and they have made up their minds. But I am hesitating, in accordance with the gentleman who spoke a few moments ago, in regard to this first case of expulsion as to how I am going to vote, and, if we are to determine right here, whether hereafter we shall hear evidence or whether we shall let the evidence be taken by the Executive Committee and then act upon their recommendation. I think we are in danger of being a little too hasty. Some gentleman has stated here that there will be no stigma cast upon this school by our action. No stigma, and a gentleman from that school here denying the charge! Whatever we do now, I feel that we shall hereafter wish to act upon a detailed report of the evidence.

Robert M. Hughes, of Virginia: It seems to me from the quotations that have been read from the Constitution of this Association that we are very much in the position of an appel

late court.

The Executive Committee are required to get the information and then we are required to take a vote upon it. Now, while I know nothing about the merits of this matter, it seems to me that for us to go ahead now and vote to expel this school, without even having the evidence in this case reported to us or read before us, would be like an appellate court deciding a case without reading the evidence.

William Draper Lewis, of Pennsylvania: There seems to be some hesitancy to act upon this report without hearing what the evidence was that was presented before the Executive Committee. I wish to ask for information whether any member of the Executive Committee would care to summarize the evidence taken before it. It seems to me if we are going to act upon this matter we should have a statement of the evidence taken before the Executive Committee.

The President: It never occurred to the Executive Committee that the members of this Association would ask for the evidence. It did not think this Association would have time to listen to the evidence, even if we had a stenographic report of it before us. If we had, and it had been read in detail before this Association, I cannot tell you when we would adjourn. I want to make that comment upon what has been said about reading the evidence. Then my second comment is this: that you will find a very great embarrassment in ascertaining facts if witnesses are to understand that everything they say upon an investigation of this character is to be reported in a public assemblage and go upon the report with their names attached to it.

William Draper Lewis: I think the Chair somewhat misunderstood my inquiry. I should be very loath to ask for the evidence under the names of the witnesses in detail, but I do wish to ask whether a summary of the evidence could not be stated by the Chair or by some member of the Executive Committee.

The President: I will say in answer to that that the charge against this school is not that in one or two instances it has

« 이전계속 »