The President: If the committee appointed to recommend officers for the ensuing year is prepared to report, their report will now be received and considered.

Mr. R. T. Barton, of Winchester: The committee nominates and recommends to the Association the following persons to fill the offices for which they are respectively named:

FOR PRESIDENT-William J. Leake, of Richmond.

FOR VICE-PRESIDENTS-William A. Anderson, Valley; R. M. Page, Southwest; William N. Portlock, Tidewater; R. G. Southall, Southside; W. M. Lile, Piedmont.

FOR SECRETARY AND TREASURER-Eugene C. Massie, of Richmond.

FOR MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE B. B. Munford, Richmond, and W. P. McRae, Petersburg.

FOR DELEGATES TO THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION—H. St. George Tucker, Lexington; J. Alston Cabell, Richmond; and R. M. Hughes, Norfolk.

On motion, the Secretary was instructed to cast the unanimous ballot of the Association for the officers recommended.

Mr. Massie: Mr. President and gentlemen,-It seems to me. that this Association should devote some attention to the subject discussed in the address just delivered by Mr. McCormick. He has touched upon matters which concern all of us, and upon matters which should be taken in hand by this Association.

We have in our Code certain sections concerning attorneys at law, viz.: Sections 3195, 3196, and 3197. Those sections are printed in a circular which has been distributed throughout the hall, and upon the opposite page are printed certain amendments thereto which have been proposed by me.

The law, as it now stands in the Code, is as follows:

SECTION 3195. When License Superseded. Any court before which an attorney has qualified, on proof being made that he has been convicted of a felony, may supersede his license.

SECTION 3196. When Suspended or Annulled for Malpractice. If the Supreme Court of Appeals or a circuit court observes any malpractice therein by an attorney, or if complaint be made to a circuit court of malpractice by an attorney therein, or in the court of the county or corporation for which said circuit court is held, such court shall issue a rule against said attorney to show cause why an information shall not be filed against him. If such information be ordered, a jury shall be impanneled, when required by the defendant, and if he be found guilty by the court, or by the jury where one is impaneled, his license shall be revoked, or suspended for a time, as may seem to the court proper. When the case is in the Supreme Court of Appeals, the court shall direct one of its officers to summon the jury from the county or corporation in which said court is then being held, to be impaneled and paid as in cases of misdemeanor in the county or corporation courts.

SECTION 3197.-How Revoked or Suspended for Failure to Pay Over Money or Deliver Security.-If an attorney-at-law collect money, or be the custodian of any security for the payment of money, and fail to pay or deliver the same, without sufficient cause, to the person entitled thereto, within a reasonable time after demand made, it shall be the duty of the Commonwealth's Attorney, on the application of the party aggrieved, to give information thereof to the circuit court of the county or corporation in which the attorney resides; and thereupon said court shall issue a rule against such attorney to show cause why his license shall not be revoked. Upon the return of the rule, a jury shall be impaneled for the trial of any matter of fact, if required by the defendant; and if it shall be found by the jury, or by the court, when no jury is impaneled, that the failure of the attorney to pay over such money or to deliver such security was without sufficient cause, his license shall be revoked, or suspended for a time, as to the court may seem proper.

I have sketched a new statute in which changes or variations from the Code are indicated in italics as follows:

SECTION 3195. When License Superseded.-Any court before which an attorney has qualified, on proof being made that he has been convicted of a felony, or of any malpractice or any corrupt unprofessional conduct, may supersede his license to practice therein.

SECTION 3196.-When Suspended or Annulled.-If the Supreme Court of Appeals, or any circuit, county, or corporation court observes any malpractice or any corrupt unprofessional conduct therein by an attorney, or if complaint be made to any such court of malpractice or of corrupt unprofessional conduct by an attorney therein, or if complaint be made to any circuit, county or corporation court of any malpractice or any corrupt unprofessional conduct by any attorney practicing therein, such court shall issue a rule against said attorney to show cause why an information shall not be filed against him. If such information be ordered, a jury shall be impaneled, when required by the defendant, and if he be found guilty by the court, or by the jury where one is impaneled, his license to practice in said court shall be revoked, or suspended for a time, as may seem to the court proper. When the case is in the Supreme Court of Appeals, the court shall direct one of its officers to summon the jury from the county or corporation in which said court is then being held, to be impaneled and paid as in cases of misdemeanor in the county or corporation court; and any revocation or suspension of license by said Supreme Court of Appeals shall operate and be effective in all the courts of the Commonwealth.

SECTION 3197.-How Revoked or Suspended for Failure to Pay over Money or Deliver Security.-If an attorney-at-law collect any money, or be the custodian of any money or any security for the payment of money, and fail to pay or deliver the same, without sufficient cause, to the person entitled thereto, within a reasonable time, it shall be the duty of the Commonwealth's Attorney, on the application of any person to give information thereof to the circuit, county or corporation court of the county or corporation in which the attorney resides; and thereupon said court shall issue a rule against such attorney to show cause why his license to practice therein shall not be revoked. Upon the return of the rule, a jury shall be impaneled for the trial of any matter of fact, if required by the defendant; and if it shall be found by the jury, or by the court, when no jury is impaneled, that the failure of the attorney to pay over such money or to deliver such security was without sufficient cause, his license to practice therein shall be revoked, or suspended for a time, as to the court may seem proper.

This Association has a Grievance Committee, which, as Mr. McCormick has said, has never yet been able to take action in

the courts against any member of the Association, or against any member of the Bar, who has transgressed the law or who has disregarded our professional ethics. We had some years ago a case which seemed to be a very good one, but, upon investigation, it was found that the Statutes in the Code were so written as to prevent us from taking any action.

We are, by our charter, permitted to take action not only against any member of this Association, but against any member of the Bar in Virginia who has been guilty of unprofessional conduct, or of such conduct as would render him liable to disbarment. Now, the first section of the Code relating to this subject is section 3195. I will not read it, but would simply refer to the proposed amendment, which is printed in italics, intended to cover "any malpractice" or "any corrupt unprofessional conduct," and further intended to limit the judgment of the court to disbarment from practice in that court; and if a lawyer is disbarred in any court, this section provides that another court may adopt that judgment, so that, by the simple entry of an order, the effect of the common law will be reached.

Now, it seems to me that perhaps the very severity of the punishment has prevented action in many cases; because, as our law now stands, if any court in the Commonwealth disbars an attorney, he is disbarred from practice in all the courts of the Commonwealth. We have never suffered from an abuse of this great power, but it is a very great power to grant to any one court, and I believe the same object will be obtained by the proposed amendment to section 3195.

The proposed amendment to section 3196 extends the power to county and corporation courts, and also provides that for "any corrupt unprofessional conduct' an attorney may be disbarred; and that he may not only be disbarred for such acts as occur within the observation of the court, to which the section in the Code now restricts the court, but that he may also be disbarred if complaint be made of any malpractice or any corrupt unprofessional conduct, whether occurring in the court or

out of the court; and, furthermore, that if an attorney be disbarred by the Supreme Court of Appeals, the judgment of that court shall run throughout the Commonwealth.

Section 3197 requires attorneys to account for all moneys and securities received by them, but only makes them liable to its pains and penalties after demand has been made. Now, we know that frequently an attorney collects money of which his client has no notice, and, therefore, his client is not in a position to make demand upon him; and it seems to me just that an attorney should be required to account for money within a reasonable time, whether demand is made upon him or not; and the amendment so provides, and, also, that it shall be the duty of the Commonwealth's Attorney, upon application of any person, to give information for the disbarment of such attorney. As the law now stands, it can only be the duty of the Commonwealth's Attorney to take such action, upon the application of the party aggrieved. I believe the doors should be thrown open, and any person allowed to bring such matters to the attention of the Commonwealth's Attorney.

I hope the members of the Association will consider this question, and that it will be generally discussed. It seems to me one that should not be referred absolutely to any single committee, but that as it concerns all of us, we should all take an interest in it, give it our attention, and discuss it thoroughly.

Mr. James P. Harrison: I would like to say that I cannot agree with one portion of this amendment. I think that the application to the Commonwealth's Attorney should be limited to the party aggrieved, instead of " upon the application of any person." I think it is rather dangerous to turn loose anybody. It might lead to applications being filed because of the mere desire of strife, the mere desire of prosecution arising from personal ill-will. I approve everything in the amendments suggested except that portion, " upon the application of any person.”

Mr. Micajah Woods, of Charlottesville: Mr. President, it