Delta Phi convention at Ann Arbor. He first requested the exclusion of reporters and then presented instances of political pressure, within his own observation, which must seriously have influenced the rulings of any judge, not made of the strongest moral fibre.

The difficulty is not confined to any particular locality or to any particular party. In Kentucky, in the Caleb Powers trials, and in South Carolina, in the Tillman trial, the conduct of the trial judges and the canvassing of talesmen by court officers before trial, in order to make certain conviction in the one and acquittal in the other, were such that the trials were in reality. conducted by the political parties. The reversals of the Powers verdicts by the Kentucky Supreme Court, and the reversals of Governor Folk's boodle convictions, by the Missouri Supreme Court, are in striking contrast. Circuit Judge Taylor of Missouri, on March 14 in Carter v. Steamfitters Union, in which Carter sought damages for keeping him out of employment, used the following language:

"The decisions are so contradictory that you are driven to general principles. Most of them are political decisions. If you look at the decisions and recall campaigns, you will find that there is a relation both in date and substance.

It is reported, that in Philadelphia in 1902, an officer in the Bureau of Elections, a political worker, was indicted and tried for election frauds. At least one of the jurors at the trial, which of course resulted in an acquittal, was under similar indictment. The District Attorney probably did not know this, but he should have known it and since the trial, the District Attorney, by Republican nomination, became Mayor of Philadelphia; his assistant became Judge of a Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, at a salary of $7500 a year, and the "worker" was reappointed to a higher office in the Bureau of Elections.

On March 10, two judges of the Ohio Circuit Court testified before an investigating committee of the Ohio Senate, that George B. Cox, the Cincinnati Republican boss, had spoken with them concerning the reversal of a $238,000 judgment obtained by that city against Lane & Bodley and the American Bonding Company, for default in a water-works contract with the city. Judge Jelke testified:

I can only speak for myself, I cannot speak for my colleagues. I do not know that I was sent for, but I called on Mr. Cox in his office. Mr. Cox said to me: " Judge, that Lane & Bodley case is coming up for hearing in your court. I wish you would find some way of reversing it." I said: "Mr. Cox, that case will be tried on its record, just like any other case."

Judge Giffens testified, in part:

Mr. Cox sent for me, Mr. Hynacka delivering the message. Mr. Cox said: "I wish you could see your way clear to reversing this case, because the Lane & Bodley Company is a large concern, and unless a compromise is effected they may be compelled to go into bankruptcy." I told Mr. Cox the case would go on trial.

In New York City, the difficulty has been partly political and partly a desire for more honor or more money, in spite of salaries of $17,500 a year. One judge spends a part of his time in large real estate operations, another is a high official in a controlling political organization, and another acts as one of the three trustees of a great insurance company. Another, who is remarkable for his efficiency, acts as trustee of a large estate, another edited Town Topics, and a Municipal Court Judge was recently removed by impeachment proceedings, brought by District Attorney Jerome, and other lawyers, as private citizens. John Foster Carr, in a recent article in the Outlook, “ Campaign Funds and Campaign Scandals," says:

"Tammany has the matter systemized, and charges according to a regular tariff for a nomination, when nomination means election. The Mazet Committee elicited the fact that a Supreme Court judge had to give a full year's salary, $17,500. The man is picked out,' says the Tammany apologist, and somehow he gets to understand what's expected of him, and he ponies up-all from gratitude, to the organization that honored him, see? Why not? He has fourteen years on the bench ahead of him, and ten thousand other lawyers would be willing to put up twice as much to be in his shoes.'

"But the value of a seat on the Supreme Court bench in New York is better understood by machine politicians to-day than it was six years ago. They consider the large salary and the length of the term a smaller matter than the rich patronage, in its gift. A judge of the Supreme Court may designate the newspapers in which legal advertisements appear, appoint guardians for wealthy orphans, commissioners in condemnation proceedings, and referees and receivers in litigations, where millions are often at stake-and the receiver's fees are princely, when large sums are involved. It is the common

talk among reputable members of the New York bar that amounts. as great at $30,000, $50,000, and even $100,000 have been paid as campaign contributions' by certain nominees for Supreme Court judgeships. Few Tammany nominees escape paying their due quota, and in the aggregate these sums are large; but judgeship plums are few, and the assessment of candidates supplies a very small part of the munitions of war."

On November 28, last, in an address at the City Club in New York, District Attorney Jerome used the following language:

"But the worst of all our troubles comes from an elective judiciary, and it's a thousandfold worse than all the rest. As a lawyer, I was brought up to reverence the bench, but with few exceptions, I have not only no reverence for our Supreme Court, but not even respect. Maybe I shouldn't say this, but I tell you that it is your cowardice -the cowardice of the bar-that is responsible for it.

"Isn't it enough to breed disrespect for the judiciary to see judges, hat in hand, pleading with a common bartender, for the privilege of serving the people? Where is the man who likes to see a man like Ingraham, going to Charley Murphy for permission to pass upon our lives and our liberties? A judge should be set aside as a priest is set aside. He should devote his whole life and time to his work. "In Massachusetts, where judges are appointed for life, you may see lawyers arguing that they would not go before this or that judge because of his decisions on this or that point of law. Here the considerations are different; because one judge borrowed the money to pay his assessment, another has this or that business interest or political debt to pay. That's the condition, gentlemen, whether you like to listen to it or not, and it's that condition that I'll fight, in or out of office, whether you take the initiative as you should, or whether you shirk your responsibilities.

"Next year a number of judges are to be elected. Have the members of the bar discussed the probable candidates? I assure you that the politicians have, and some of the slates have already been made up. That's my fight, and I tell you that you can't expect any of your other officers to be good, unless you start with a good judiciary. You can't raise the rest of the system higher than the bench. You may not like all this, but burned in my mind is the spectacle of a judge pleading for office with Charley Murphy, and if it wasn't burned there then I never ask again for the respect of my fellow-man."

The recent New York legislature, in order to remedy the crowded condition of the calendars, provided for two additional Supreme Court judges, at Buffalo, and eight, in New York City. At Buffalo, 584 of 1,230 lawyers of that district met at the City Hall, pursuant to a call from the bar association, to indicate by

ballot their preference for the judicial nominees. One hundred and twenty-one persons were considered, the largest vote, 347. being for Judge Pound, and as the district is strongly Republican, the names suggested largely belong to that party, the Democratic delegates charged that the meeting was merely a political gathering.

In New York City, the Bar Association would not accept the responsibility, but a Committee of the Bar, headed by Joseph H. Choate as chairman and ex-Judge Alton B. Parker as vice chairman, presented the names of eight persons for the new judgeships and renominated the four judges whose terms expired, and have appealed to the Bar generally for its support. The question is not as to the merits of an appointed or of an elected judiciary, for the majority of our judges will probably always be elected. But the question is how to secure judges, whose every action will be beyond any suggestion of party favor, and who will give the state their full time.

There never was a time when the American bench was more able than it is to-day, and it is only in localities where politics are bad and political pressure strong, that conditions need attention. It is the lawyer's duty, as an officer of the Court, and as a citizen, to do what he can to elevate to the bench men of ability and of integrity.

The lawyers, of at least two localities, have the opportunity to support lawyers' and not politicians' candidates. The final result will depend on what the lawyers themselves demand and whether or not they are willing to work for a judiciary that will not be subject to the stress of political pressure.

Review of Law Reviews.

[REVIEWERS: ERNEST E. WHEELER, ROBERT MCCURDY MARSH, H. STARR GIDDINGS, RUTGER B. MILLER, HOWARD H. WILLIAMS, JAMES D. WILLIAMS and ROYAL VICTOR, Story.]

HARVARD LAW REVIEW.

MARCH, 1906. Equitable Conversion.-C. C. LANGDELL. The seventh in the series of articles by Professor Langdell on this subject.

66

State and Official Liability.-EDMUND M. PARKER. This is a frank criticism of the chapter entitled "The Rule of Law contrasted with Droit Administratif" in Dicey on the Law of the Constitution, Sixth Edition. Professor Dicey says that every servant of the government (in France) possesses, as a representative of the nation, a whole body of special rights, privileges, or prerogatives, as against private citizens, and that the extent of these rights, privileges, or prerogatives, is to be determined on principles different from the considerations which fix the legal rights and duties of one citizen towards another. "This notion," he says, is alien to the conceptions of modern Englishmen." The writer contends that whether or not such a conception is alien to the conception of modern Englishmen, it is not in the conflict with the law of England. To support this contention, he instances the different rules which apply in an action for false arrest, when the defendant is a private citizen, and when he is a peace officer; that grants from the Crown are construed favorably for the Crown, and that when a man-of-war runs into a vessel, the only remedy the owner of the vessel can get is against her commander. The writer further questions statements made by Professor Dicey as to the operation of the Droit Administratif in France, and appreciating the author's prestige, warns students against too great a reliance upon the statements in this chapter.

The Genesis of the Corporation.-ROBERT L. RAYMOND. This is an historical investigation tracing the development of the idea of corporate existence from its ecclesiastical source, and showing that the idea "grew by nature." Not until the middle of the fifteenth