PROCEEDINGS.

with which the judicial mind is satisfied as to the existence of these statutory prerequisites to the right of admission to citizenship is, to say the least, remarkable. That the usual investigation of these matters is in any just sense adequate to the ascertainment of the facts can hardly be seriously pretended. Lawyers attending court during the period just preceding any general election have seen the regular business of the court interrupted, many times during the day, and every one else kept waiting, while scores of applicants for citizenship with their witnesses were herded in front of the judicial desk and subjected in turn to a few hurried and more or less perfunctory questions, usually in the precise language of the statute-after which they were again herded into a corner, where the oath was administered by the clerk-and behold another "batch" has been duly admitted to all and singular the glorious privileges of citizenship in the United States of America. How many such have been admitted who never had the slightest comprehension even of the words addressed to them by the court, to say nothing of the real significance of the questions and their answers thereto, none may know. The number must certainly be very considerable. Nothing could be further from the spirit of the transaction than a purpose to impress either the onlookers or the participants with any idea of the profound solemnity of the act, the value and dignity of the privileges conferred, or the responsibilities of the obligation assumed. The whole tendency of the proceeding is to belittle, cheapen and make utterly trivial and insignificant an act of the highest significance and greatest importance both to the applicant and to the nation.

It is understood that the United States government has recently. been investigating this subject, chiefly with a view to putting a stop to fraudulent naturalizations which, under the present system, are only too easily accomplished. It is earnestly to be hoped that this investigation may result in the adoption of more stringent regulations, a more impressive and dignified procedure and, withal, in the adoption of a higher standard for admission to citizenship than now prevail.

The report of the Bureau of Immigration indicates that the close of the present year, ending June 30, will show an aggregate record for the year of one million additions to our population from foreign countries. However large and abounding the hospitality with which we welcome to our shores and to a share in our opportunities the honest, worthy, self-supporting immigrant, it is certain that we cannot afford to belittle or cheapen that supreme privilege which is the true foundation of all our civic greatness and prosperity. Certain it is that

PROCEEDINGS.

a reckless disregard of the fundamental obligations of citizenship is one of the most dangerous tendencies of the times.

Another matter, not wholly unrelated in some of its phases to the one just mentioned and which we think cannot be too often nor too strongly emphasized by this Association, is the abiding necessity for preserving the highest possible standard of professional ethics.

It seems to be thought by some that a sort of intellectual dishonesty-the habit of pursuing tortuous and perverted lines of reasoning for the accomplishment of desired results-may not be inconsistent with the possession of strict moral honesty-the kind that forbids a man to lie, steal or betray a trust; that if a lawyer can persuade a judge by consciously false reasoning to an erroneous judgment, the responsibility is wholly shifted from the advocate to the judge. But aside from the fact that there never could in fact be any distinct line of demarcation between moral and intellectual dishonesty, it is certain that the cultivation of the latter must inevitably result in the creation of the former. No true reform, structural or administrative, in any branch or department of the law, can be expected to emanate from the dishonest mind any more than from the dishonest heart.

One of the greatest of American lawyers, Nicholas Hill of New York, is said to have once declared in substance that never, in the course of a long experience at the bar, had he permitted himself to attempt to win a case by persuading the court by means of arguments which he believed to be unsound or by the statement as a fact of that which he did not honestly and with just reason believe to be true.

In one, at least, of our states, the oath prescribed to be taken by attorneys on their admission to the bar, comprises a most admirable statement of professional obligation.

"You shall do no falsehood or consent that any be done in court, and if you know of any, you will give knowledge thereof to the judges of the court, or some one of them, that it may be reformed; you shall Lot wittingly, willingly, or knowingly promote, sue, or procure to be sued, any false or unlawful suit, or give aid or consent to the same; you shall delay no man for lucre or malice, but shall act in the office of attorney in this court according to your best learning and discretion, with all good fidelity, as well to the court as to your client. So help you God."

Falsehood and deceit in the prosecution or defense of actions, all forms of wilful imposition upon the courts, should be relentlessly exposed and punished. Honesty and good faith in all professional intercourse should be insisted on. Sharp practices, balancing on the verge of dishonesty, should not be tolerated.

PROCEEDINGS.

To defend by honest means a man charged in a civil or criminal proceeding with a violation of the law, may be a duty. To devote professional skill, knowledge and experience to the work of contriving means and methods for breaking or evading the law with impunity, is to become a sharer in the wrong and to degrade and dishonor a noble calling.

Year by year witnesses large accessions to the already crowded ranks of our profession. It is an honor to the profession that among them all so few, comparatively, prove morally unworthy. But it devolves upon this Association, representing as it does the bar of the whole state, to insist constantly and resolutely upon the maintenance of the highest standards of professional honor and integrity. It has no higher duty, no greater responsibility. And in the larger and more general relations of life, those which concern the lawyer as a citizen of the community in which he dwells, it is equally his duty to be found steadfast for the supremacy of the law.

There can be no doubt that a spirit of lawlessness, of disregard for the restraints and sanctions of the law, is becoming alarmingly prevalent. High and low, rich and poor, employer and laborer, men and women of mature years and children at school, are becoming infected with this dread disease, a disease which, it is not too much to say, strikes at the very foundations of national life. The vital truth that there can be no true liberty without sincere respect for and obedience to law, seems the hardest of all to learn. To aid, publicly and privately, in inculcating respect for constituted authority is a duty which belongs to our citizenship.

When we witness such scenes as those which have been enacted in this city during the past few weeks; our streets thronged and made perilous by riotous gangs of men bent on enforcing their demands by violence, business interrupted, peaceable citizens terrorized, working men prevented from earning their daily bread; the orders of the courts defied; when school children are instructed by their parents in the arts of the rioter and the thug and when the leaders of these law defying mobs, some of whom have come to this city for the express purpose of organizing these evil forces, and have openly proclaimed their unlawful purposes, instead of being dealt with summarily as principals in a conspiracy against the public peace and safety, are invited to conferences with a view to some compromise or settlement by which their sovereign permission may be secured for the peaceful resumption of business; in view of these conditions, it would seem to be opportune for this Association, representing and standing for the supremacy of

PROCEEDINGS.

the law and for the security of liberty by law, to speak in defense of these great, these vital principles with no uncertain sound.

Chicago, May 25, 1905.

WILLIAM E. CHURCH,

Chairman.

MR. CHURCH: In the direction of the reform in the law and procedure of this state, speaking for myself, I say that there seems to be only one remedy, and that is a general revision of the whole subject which shall wipe out entirely the antiquated system under which we have been so long laboring, and substitute some new and intelligible system. I anı tempted in this connection to relate a little incident which illustrates my own feelings on the subject. In a thriving town in a neighboring state there stood in the center of the town an old dilapidated hotel. A wave of prosperity had struck the village and improvement was the order of the day. The streets were improved, handsome dwellings were being erected and fine business blocks, and the citizens had begun to take a great deal of pride in their village, but there stood this old dilapidated hotel, the shutters falling off, the pillars of the veranda decayed, the shingles dropping from the roof, the windows broken. Every effort had been made to induce the proprietor to either sell the property or to rebuild, but they had been entirely in vain. There it remained, a blot upon the beauty of the village. One day a fire broke out and it was announced to the great joy of everybody that the old hotel was in flames. The fire department promptly responded, a line of hose was carried up to the top of the adjoining building, and one patriotic citizen seized the nozzle and began to direct the stream of water everywhere except upon the old hotel. Suddenly another individual with more zeal than discretion came running up to him and said, "Here, this is no way to put out a fire, I will show you how to do that. Why don't you put the stream in the hotel?" He seized the nozzle and directed the stream upon the hotel and unfortunately the flames were very soon extinguished. Whereupon the first

PROCEEDINGS.

individual turned away with the disgusted remark, "Well, you may be a better fireman than I am, but you are a damned poor citizen." That is my feeling about the attempts that are constantly being made to patch up our old practice act. I looked it over the other day, in a general way, that is, the sections of our statute which pertain to procedure in our courts, and you may perhaps be surprised, you who have never taken the trouble to look up that subject, to know that a very hasty count, which did not include by any means all sections, showed that there are over two thousand sections of our statute which are concerned with the question of practice and procedure in our courts,-over two thousand sections. And it is all patch work from beginning to end, unintelligible, inharmonious, as has well been said. And I may say that I am very glad our President and Secretary have included this subject in the program. (Applause.)

PRESIDENT GREGORY: Gentlemen, the report of the committee represented by Judge Church is before you. If there is no discussion or no special order desired, it will be received, filed, and printed in the report of the proceedings.

I would ask Mr. Williams if he is prepared to read his memorial upon Judge Lawrence at this time.

MR. WILLIAMS: I can do so if you desire, Mr. President. I did not think you would care for it until afternoon, but as you say.

PRESIDENT GREGORY: If you are willing, Mr. Williams, I would like to have you read it now.

MR. WILLIAMS: I will do so as best I may.

Mr. President, and members of the Association: When I was notified by Judge Otis that I was to be asked to present a paper concerning Judge Lawrence, before whom it was my good fortune as a boy at the bar first to learn something of the practice, I said that to me it would be a labor of love. The matter, as I came to consider it, grew upon me until absolute

Y