proximate uniformity in practice, but with such guide and standard, the conception may not be beyond the bounds of possibility; thus, in many states the United States chancery practice is the model for the state chancery practice, and in many is made a part of such practice by statutory adoption, and it may very readily be that since the simplification of the United States Equity Rules by the Supreme Court of the United States, they will be adopted by many states having a distinctive chancery practice. And so, if there be formulated by, or under the authority of Congress, a uniform practice at law worked out wisely and well to meet modern demands, many, if not all, of the states may substitute such practice for theirs now existing, in order that they may not have two separate systems within one jurisdiction, and that they may assimilate themselves to their sister states. A very able and zealous committee of this association has now in hand the procurement of this end, and every aid should be rendered by every member. But I tarry too long. After all, pleading and practice are but the reins with which the courts drive the lawyers, and if the horses be sluggards, and the drivers slumberers, then the traces sag and the causes drag. Changes should be made, and systems perfected, but in and of themselves they are as useless as a puff ball or a Sodom apple. To bring to them the highest effectiveness, there must come to, and remain with, the judges and lawyers, the high conception that they themselves are the vicars of the law; that the law is the servant of justice; that justice must be unshackled of needless forms and delays; and crystallizing their conception into a habit of professional life, they must give the lie to the charge of quaint old Charles Macklin, made more than two hundred years ago: "The law is a sort of hocus pocus science, that smiles in yer face while it picks yer pocket; and the glorious uncertainty of it is of mair use to the professors than the justice of it." REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON JURISPRUDENCE AND LAW REFORM. To the American Bar Association: At the session of 1910 the following resolution was referred to your Committee on Jurisprudence and Law Reform: "WHEREAS, The Constitution of the United States, in the Fifth Amendment, provides that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,' and in the Sixth that he shall not only be entitled to a public trial by an impartial jury, but shall have the assistance of counsel for his defense'; and "WHEREAS, The same principles of individual right have been adopted by the various states; and 66 WHEREAS, From the common reports of the examinations of accused persons made by the police departments in many of the municipalities throughout the country, such persons are examined in private, without the assistance of any one present to advise them as to their individual rights; and that from the rigid and often harsh examinations, accused persons are, in effect, compelled to be witnesses against themselves, contrary to the true intent of the constitutional provisions and contrary to all sense of fairness and justice; and WHEREAS, This Association believes that such practices should be condemned and the individual rights of accused persons should be protected by a uniform law; therefore Be it resolved, That it is the sense of this Association that in all criminal prosecutions no confession of the accused should be received in evidence, unless it is affirmatively shown at the trial that it was made voluntarily, in the presence of a third disinterested person, selected by the accused, and not in any way connected with the police department or the prosecuting attorney's office, and, after the accused has been informed in the presence of such third party, that while he need not answer interrogatories, nor make a statement, yet, if he does, the statement would be used against him. "Resolved, further, That appropriate legislation be recommended to carry into effect such protection to the accused." Your committee reported as follows: "It will be noted that this resolution applies in all criminal prosecutions.' The proposition is to exclude confessions in all criminal prosecutions, unless it is shown that the confession was not only made voluntarily, but made in the presence of a third person, selected by the accused. In dealing with the specific evil of investigation by the police department or prosecuting attorney's office, the resolution goes too far, and would exclude confessions, voluntarily made, and which, under the rules of evidence, are admissible. The exact character of this third degree is so little known that it is difficult to lay down any rule concerning it. A due investigation to discover crime is proper; while recourse to methods set out in the preamble to the resolution are most reprehensible. Conditions differ in various police departments. The evil is local, and the remedy must be local." The report of the committee was adverse to the adoption of the resolution, and the mover of the resolution, Mr. Thomas Mackenzie, of Maryland, offered as a substitute his resolution for the recommendation. This motion was lost, and the report of the committee was adopted. See Report, 1911, pp. 15 and 16. Substantially the same resolution was again offered and referred to this committee, and again there was an adverse report. Report, 1912, p. 430. See To this report Mr. Mackenzie excepted, and moved that it be "recommitted to the committee." Again it has been considered and the two previous judgments are affirmed, and, for the reason set out in the previous reports, which, in substance, is, that the law governing the admissibility of confessions affords a sufficient safeguard for the protection of the accused. Your committee recommends that the resolution be not adopted. The other matter referred to your committee was a resolution, in these words: "Upon creation and removal of United States judges and to abolish life tenure of office." Judges of the United States Courts are appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and hold. their offices during good behavior. Generally stated, judges may be selected in one of three ways: by popular election, legislative election or executive appointment. Election by the people brings the judges into active local politics, with all the attending evils; makes elevation to the Bench depend on the fickle favor of the populace, and erroneously assumes that the average voter has sufficient information to decide intelligently upon the character, experience and fitness of a candidate for judicial office. Election by the legislature is less objectionable than by the direct vote of the people, but it has not proven satisfactory in certain states, because of political combinations, corruption and divided responsibility. There is no reason to suppose that election of judges by Congress would prove more satisfactory. The conclusion reached by your committee is that the present method of executive appointment is to be preferred, largely because it imposes a direct responsibility on the President, and for the further reason that, with few exceptions, the judges of the United States courts have measured up to the full stature of judicial dignity, ability and integrity. Upon the subject of removal of federal judges, your committee is of the opinion that, where from among a learned profession a certain few are set apart as worthy to be vested with the large powers of the federal judiciary, that there should be no removal from the Bench, save for grave and weighty reasons. By no procedure less imposing than that of impeachment by the representatives of the nation, in the face of the nation and on a responsibility which is felt and reverenced by the nation, should a judge be degraded. This respect should be shown, not to the man, but to the judge, to him who personifies the law. As to the tenure by which the federal judges hold their office, your committee is of the opinion that it should not be changed. Short tenures, and the uncertainty of tenure, together with the inadequacy of compensation, impair the efficiency of the Bench and breed disrespect for the law. Your committee recommends that there be no change in the law providing for the creation and removal of United States judges, and further recommends that the life tenure of United States judges be not abolished. P. W. MELDRIM, Chairman, JOHN H. WIGMORE. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION AND To the American Bar Association: At the last meeting of the Association there was referred to the Committee on Judicial Administration and Remedial Procedure a resolution offered by Joseph B. David, of Illinois, as follows: WHEREAS, Every person indicted for a criminal offense or against whom is filed an information charging the commission of a crime should be entitled as matter of right to a copy of the accusation without cost and also the names and addresses of the witnesses on whose testimony the indictment was found, or information filed, and also to a list of the jury which may be called upon to try the accused; and, WHEREAS, Section 1033 of the Revised Statutes of the United States provides: 66 When any person is indicted of treason, a copy of the indictment and the list of the jury, and of the witnesses to be produced on the trial of the indictment, for proving the indictment, stating the place of abode of each juror and witness, shall be delivered to him at least three entire days before he is tried for the same. When any person is indicted of any other capital offence, such copy of the indictment and list of the jurors and witnesses shall be delivered to him at least two entire days before the trial." Now, therefore, be and it is hereby resolved by the American Bar Association that said Section 1033 ought to be amended by adding thereto the following: When any person is indicted for any criminal offence or against whom has been filed an information charging a crime or misdemeanor, a copy of the indictment or information shall be furnished him, without cost, at the time of or before his arraignment or before he is called on to plead to such indictment or information, and the names and addresses of the witnesses appearing before the Grand Jury, in case of an indictment, shall be endorsed |