istration of the criminal, as well as the civil, law. I recall that Mr. Alger had an article in the Atlantic Monthly but a few months ago on the need of reform in the administration of the criminal law, in which this general subject was discussed very broadly and carefully, and you have seen other articles along the same line. It is evident that the public mind is set in a direction that there is vital need for reform in those matters, in the substantive law and in the administration of justice. They are convinced that there is something radically wrong in the administration of justice, and it is a subject that ought to occupy seriously the attention of the Bar. Now, of course, it has been suggested in those papers at various meetings of the Bar, and the discussion of those subjects by Judges and Lawyers in the magazines and the press, that there is need of, it may be, a reform in the law and the administration of the law, but no one seeks to get down to the real practical work of achieving results in those matters. As has been suggested by Mr. Hodge, it seems to me that no body of men can better direct the public mind soundly to consider and affect legislation, and remedy these evils, than the Bar of the United States. It seems to me that the Committee on Law Reform of this Association ought to take up seriously the question, and formulate something for the Association to act upon. It has occurred to members of the Bar that these meetings which are held but once a year give but little time for any considerable consideration or discussion of those topics, and that there is real need of some definite organization, some definite effort to bring about some result. Of course, the masses believe with Emerson, at least I hope that they do, that only justice satisfies all; and, to have justice that will satisfy all, it is important that those who are familiar with

the law and who understand the correct principles of our Government, our method of the administration of justice, should direct the public mind safely and soundly that we may avoid the great evils that are apprehended from the tendency of the times, among many of the people, to socialism, and the dangers which beset our country arising from notions of that kind prevailing among the masses of the people. It seems to me that there is need of an organization to insure the administration of the correct principles of law and justice or rather enlighten the mind of the public so that they may correctly consider or correctly guide their conduct through their representatives in the Legislature in the enactment of statutes, and in the bringing about of a satisfactory administration of justice.

William V. Rowe, of New York:

Mr. President, the Bar is all right and the Bench is all right. We are the only agents that can possibly educate the people in the law. We are so engaged in the pursuit of wealth that we neglect our duty, if you please. That is simply due to our shortness of sight, which gives us no chance to appreciate and perform our real duty. There is one thing that we should do most clearly, we should make it perfectly clear that under our AngloSaxon institution there can be no such thing in this country as an irresponsible popular criticism of the judicial action of an upright judge. The trouble is that we have submitted to and encouraged popular criticism of judicial action instead of teaching the people that their representative on the bench acted in good faith, and is to be respected and reverenced and never criticised for upright conduct. This strikingly suggestive paper, which would bear limitless debate, it seems to me, has perhaps gone

just too far in condemning any reference to what is conceived to be the growth of public policy. Our law is a living thing; it is not a dead letter of a statute; it is constantly growing, and it can grow only by reference to public policy, not public opinion, which is a thing of constant growth; therefore, we can never say to our courts you shall not pay reverence to public opinion or public policy, but we can say you shall never be guided by public opinion. Our law would never grow were it not for its constant ear to the ground as to what public policy in our national growth demands.

The President:

Perhaps it is necessary to call attention to the fact that it is a quarter past one and past the usual hour for our adjournment, and suggest whether the debate should not be adjourned until this afternoon.

Roland Crangle, of Buffalo:

Mr. President, with that in view, I was only going to say a few words. I have listened with a great deal of pleasure and attention to the words spoken by the learned gentleman from New York. I do not, however, agree with all contained in the paper. I do not agree with the suggestions of gentlemen who have commented on the paper from a certain point of view. The popular voice of the people has brought about, on the part of the President of this country, an idea which is supported by the people, that corporations should be curbed, and that the time has arrived when they ought to be curbed. Mr. President, there was a time in the history of this country and of this State when it was necessary to have corporations, and no one has a greater regard for corporations than I have. At that time they were necessary

to the development of our State and our country, and towns throughout the State bonded themselves in order to bring that about. In later years these corporations, to my mind, have grown so powerful that they are a menace to us, the people, and I am a corporation lawyer, too. It is well known that for the past twenty-five years our Legislature up on the hill here has been dominated by corporation control, and laws have been passed at their dictation. There is no question about that. The Senators representing the State of New York, who have been placed there by the people of the State, are under the domination and control of corporations, and seventy-five per cent, I am sorry to say, of the State Legislators of our country are lawyers, and they have been dominated and they have drawn these laws. The gentleman speaks of reverence for the Bench. No one is more sorry than I am that it is a fact that the people are continually, at the present time, talking with irreverence, to say the least, if not more than that, of the Bench. A little while ago there was an opportunity for this Association, as an Association of Lawyers and standing for what is best and purest on the Bench, to record itself on a case that one of its Committees, after full investigation, reported, I think unanimously, was a case for the consideration of this Association, but by a vote of 99 to 100, or somewheres thereabouts, it was decided by this Association that no action should be taken. I tell you, sir, that one instance has placed a mark on this Association, not alone on this Association, but upon the members of the Bar throughout the State of New York that is not creditable to us. Now, it is all right to say we should say nothing against the Bench. We know that should be so if there was no reason for it. A little while ago down in the City

of New York you were a member of a committee because of your high ideals in regard to the Bench, the law and lawyers, I take it - you were on a committee to say who should be nominated for Justices of the Supreme Court. Was your work effective? Were your ideals placed before the people, or were there men nominated that you, as a lawyer and a man of high ideals, could have no respect for and will not now have when you go before them, except to treat them as they should be, because they are in the position in which they are, as a matter of courtesy. I am sorry to have said so much, but I felt I owed it to myself because I disagreed with certain things the gentleman has said.

Charles J. Buchanan, of Albany:

Mr. President, I ask leave to present now the report of the Executive Committee and that the Secretary read it.

The President:

The report of the Executive Committee will be received and will be read at the opening of the session this afternoon.

Frank Harvey Field, of New York:

Mr. President, I move we take a recess until 2.15 this afternoon.

The motion was duly seconded and carried.