The business of the Conference this year was carried over partly from last year. There was a discussion last year as to the work that local and state har associations throughout the country should do in an effort to repress the unlawful practice of the law by trust companies and other corporations, as well as other lay agencies, and, as the result of the discussion last year, it was decided that a special committee should be appointed to prepare a brief on the law involved for the use of state and local bar asso-. ciations. A special committee consisting of W. H. H. Piatt, John Lowell, George Sutherland, Clarence N. Goodwin and Hugh Henry Brown, reported at this session. Their brief was ordered sent to all state and local bar associations, and the associations were requested to take the definition in that brief and urge its adoption into the statute laws of the states.

The other matter was the matter of the incorporation of the Bar of each state. Last year we considered the model act prepared by the American Judicature Society. Herbert Harley appeared before the Conference and presented the features of that act, and it was determined that the matter should be considered by state bar associations. A special committee appointed to consider the matter reported this year. That report was freely discussed and approved, and it was recommended to the state bar associations of the country that they consider the report and take appropriate action thereon.

The third matter that came before the Conference was the result of a resolution of last year calling upon the Conference to take up the matter of the study of aeronautics and aerography. A committee was appointed, and the report of that committee came in. It was the opinion of the executive officers of the Conference that that was not a proper subject to be considered; that it belonged more properly within the American Bar Association; and, at the suggestion of those officers, the committee itself moved that the valuable material which it had gathered be transmitted to the American Bar Association for reference to such committee or section or any other body to which the American Bar Association decided to send it. So as to that matter the action of the Conference is simply the transmittal of all of that material to the Association, and I shall forward it to the Secretary with the recommendation for reference as I have stated.

The programs for the meetings of the Conference have always been prepared by the committee in co-operation with the Executive Committee of the American Bar Association.

In addition to the specific matters that I have referred to, the Conference discussed generally in open forum (1) What are state and local bar associations doing to impress upon the people of their communities the vital importance of respect for law? (2) How can the influence of such associations in that field be increased? (3) What are the state and local bar associations doing to promote knowledge and understanding on the part of the people of their communities of the fundamental principles of American institutions? We had 99 delegates on our roll; the roll of our associations was called, each association reported through its representative and very briefly stated what it was doing, and what it hoped to do in the direction indicated by these three questions. I think every one of the gentlemen will agree that that discussion was not only instructive, but was inspiring. The result was that these three questions were transmitted to the state and local bar associations throughout the country with the request that they give consideration to them and report through their delegates at the next meeting of the Conference.

At the request of the Executive Committee the subject of becoming a Section of the American Bar Association was presented to the Conference, and the difficult questions arising out of the nature of the Conference and its future relationship to the Association were worked out satisfactorily, and By-Laws were submitted and unanimously approved by the Conference, and I understand unanimously approved by the Executive Committee of the American Bar Association.

Committee on Professional Ethics and Grievances:

H. J. Bliss, of Missouri:

I received a letter from Mr. Jessup, who is somewhere in the mountains of Pennsylvania, that Judge Ryan of this city had been deputized by Mr. Jessup to read the report, but Judge Ryan fled to the mountains of Colorado, and suggested my name to Mr. Jessup, and that is the reason why I am here. I wish to read the letter forwarded to me by Mr. Jessup, as follows:

<< Thank you for your willingness to move the adoption of our report and recommendations at the meeting of the American Bar Association. May I ask you in so doing to call attention to the reports of the committee on ethics and of the committee on the unlawful practice of the law, of the Commercial Law League of America, printed in the June number of the Bulletin of the Commercial Law League, referring to their standardization of an information card as to an attorney's qualifications? Also as to the indirect solicitation of business by lawyers affiliated with collection agencies and the solicitation of claims against bankrupt estates, and, under unlawful practice of the law, the paragraph as to improper division of fees. I think these reports are significant."

The report of the committee makes the following recommendations:

I. That the Executive Committee be authorized to invite the various bar associations of the country, both state and local, to send copies of their annual reports to this Association, either to the Secretary or to the Chairman of this committee, in order that the Association may have available data as to activity.

(a) In discipline cases;

(b) In preventing unlawful practice of the law;

(c) The local activity of Bench and Bar in regard to the Canons of Ethics.

II. That the Executive Committee invite the bar associations of the states where the Canons of this Association have not yet been adopted to take definite action this coming year.

III. That this Committee on Grievances and Professional Ethics be reconstituted so as to be more central and with a membership not widely separated so that stated meetings can be conveniently held.

I move the approval of the report and the adoption of its recommendations.

The motion was carried.

Committee on Commerce, Trade and Commercial Law:

Francis B. James, of the District of Columbia:

The activities of the committee for the past year are fully set forth in our report. The committee has summarized its recommendations on pages 1 and 2, and the recommendations are six

in number. The report is in print, and it has been widely distributed, and therefore I will not stop to read it.

I move the adoption of the report.

The motion was carried.

(For Report, see July Journal, page 427.)

Committee on International Law:

Secretary Kemp:

Mr. C. N. Gregory, Chairman of this committee, wrote to your Secretary that he would be unable to be present at this meeting. The report is in print, and copies of it are on the table for distribution.

The President:

Without objection, we will consider the report as passed and approved.

(For Report, see July Journal, page 451.)

Committee on Insurance Law:

Arthur I. Vorys, of Ohio:

The bill that was prepared by the Committee on Insurance Law was approved by the American Bar Association and recommended for passage by Congress. It was proposed as a so-called model law for the regulation of insurance, and the committee was instructed to press the passage of the bill.

The committee saw fit not to urge the bill upon the 65th Congress, but the bill was submitted to the committees of the House and of the Senate of the 66th Congress, and, after a conference, the bill was introduced in the Senate by the Chairman of the Committee on the District of Columbia, and in the House by the Chairman of the District of Columbia Committee. Afterwards the Senate Committee convened and discussed the bill, but on account of war legislation and matters of more vital interest the consideration of the bill was postponed. We have every reason to believe that the Senate Committee will take it up, and act upon it this year.

The report of our committee recommends, and I put this now in the form of a motion, that the committee be instructed to urge the passage of the bill before the next session of Congress.

The motion was carried.

(For Report, see July Journal, page 449.)

Committee on Memorials:

The audience arose and remainded standing during the reading of the report by the Secretary.

(See Report at end of minutes, page 304.)

Committee on Jurisprudence and Law Reform:

Thomas J. O'Donnell, of Colorado:

Everett P. Wheeler of New York is not here, a fact I am sure we all regret. At a meeting of the committee, held in New York in April, Mr. Wheeler announced that he could not be here, and I was deputed to make the report.

The report of the committee takes up, first, the removal of causes from the state courts to the federal courts. There has been much confusion as to what is meant by "the proper district" and a great contrariety of decision. Mr. Boston, in a paper read last year before the Conference of Bar Association Delegates, pointed out this contrariety, which he had previously shown in an article published in the Central Law Journal. As a result, the committee has prepared this bill, which is so short that I will read it. It amends Section 28 of the Judicial Code by adding at the end thereof the following paragraph:

"In all cases of removal where the defendant is not a resident of the state, district, or division of the district in which it is brought, the District Court of the United States for the proper district shall be the one having jurisdiction in the district or division thereof where suit is brought in the state court."

The committee also recommend a bill authorizing the courts of the United States to enter declaratory judgments. The subject of declaratory judgments being perhaps new to many members of the Association, I may say that the purpose is to enable parties between whom a controversy has arisen to submit the same to the court before any breach of the contract between them has