little value to students for lack of discussion of principles. Several of the better correspondence schools, however, are not fairly open to criticism in this respect, but use the standard elementary treatises for students still employed in those resident schools that have not adopted the case method of study.

In the next place, the student is usually given a circular of directions regarding his study, which often contains excellent suggestions. He also receives, at intervals, examination papers, containing questions which he is asked to answer, sometimes without the aid of his books, and sometimes with all the aid he can obtain from them. Almost without exception these questions are valueless as a stimulus to thought. Frequently they follow the language or arrangement of the text in such a manner that it is almost impossible to answer them wrongly. Many of them simply call for conventional definitions, and too few of them deal with matters of any practical legal interest. The student's answers to these questions are returned to him, with a few perfunctory comments, and sometimes some circular matter intended to correct the commoner mistakes. Mistakes of an unusual character are often overlooked by this mechanical treatment. I have seen some examination answers returned by one of the better correspondence law schools, in which the most naïve and startling statements had passed unchallenged, apparently because the overworked reader had not been looking for such extraordinary blunders. When the examination papers are marked, it is rare that the grade is not sufficiently encouraging, so that the student will continue to pay his installments. Sometimes copies of a few special lectures upon various topics are sent at intervals to be used with the text-books. The quality of these is more frequently rhetorical than legal.

In all this we see the too familiar spectacle of money coined from the hopes and ambitions of the ignorant and ill-advised. A method of education that within its proper limits has carried new hope to thousands is here prostituted to practically useless ends. I have not spoken of the grossly fraudulent representations regarding the recognition of correspondence work by resident law schools and by bar examiners, which are constantly made by a few correspondence law schools. I am glad to believe that most of them, at least, steer clear of criminal or civil liability; but, from what I have seen of the commercial and educational methods of correspondence law schools, I believe that they belong in the same class with enterprises which advertise mining stocks, rubber plantations, medical cure-alls, and the teaching of aërial navigation by mail.

The Section adopted a resolution to the effect that the Committee on Stand

ard Rules for Admission to the Bar be continued, and directed to send a copy of its report in full to all members of State Boards of Bar Examiners and to all deans of law schools, with a request for suggestions and criticisms, and also that prior to May 1, 1910, the Committee submit a copy of its preliminary draft, with the rules, to each member of the American Bar Association and the Chief Justice of each state appellate court, to each member of the State Boards of Bar Examiners, and to the deans of all American law schools, with the request for criticisms and suggestions, and present its final report at the 1910 meeting of the Section, in the light of the replies so received.

The sixteen rules submitted in the report of the Committee on Standard Rules for Admission to the Bar were then discussed, and were either approved, amended, or disapproved.

After some difference of opinion, the first rule was approved as printed in the report. In discussing this rule, JOHN H. WIGMORE, of Illinois, said:

I have had an extremely harsh case of this particular kind come to my notice lately, and I have had occasion to reflect upon it. I think, where there are cities which include from 50,000 to 100,000 Poles, Italians, Germans, and other foreign nationalities, we all realize that there are great abuses under our law. For instance, in every Italian district, do you think that they go to our courts? They have padrones that do their entire law business. There is a king of Little Italy in Chicago, who keeps them all out of the courts. What is the reason? One reason is that, if you do not permit an adult alien to become a member of the bar, you throw those people back for their legal advice upon shysters, who cannot get admitted, and who take away from them the advice of good men, who may not yet be citizens because of our rules; and while the theory of this is ennobling and particularly American, it seems to me it is nothing but a theory, and that we had better recognize cosmopolitan conditions, and not for the sake of a theory have a rule which would prevent us in the next twenty years from doing a little more justice to our great foreign population.

While some agreed that the point made by Mr. Wigmore was well taken, the majority were of the opinion that it would be a mistake to allow Italians, Russians, or in fact any one, to become officers of our courts and ministers of justice, unless they first became American citizens.

The second rule was amended, so as to require the candidate, on admission, to prove that it is his intention personally to maintain an office, etc.

The third rule was amended by striking out the word "certificate" and inserting in its place the word "affidavit.”

The fourth rule was disapproved by

the Section.

The fifth, sixth, and seventh rules were approved as printed in the report. The eighth rule was amended by adding to it the words "or an examination equivalent thereto."

The ninth rule was approved as printed.

Franklin M. Danaher of New York, moved that rule 10 be amended so as to require the candidate to serve his clerkship in the office of a regular attorney in

the state in which he applies for admission. This motion to amend was lost, and the rule was approved as printed in the report.

The eleventh rule was the cause of considerable discussion, but was finally approved as printed.

The twelfth rule was amended so as to include the subject "Conflict of Laws." The thirteenth and fourteenth rules were approved as printed.

The fifteenth rule was disapproved. The sixteenth rule was approved as printed.

The report of the Special Committee,

appointed at the 1908 meeting, with reference to conferring the decree of LL. B., was read; but, because of lack of time, action upon it was postponed until next year.

On the recommendation of the Committee on Nominations, William O. Hart, of New Orleans, La., was elected Chairman, and Charles M. Hepburn, of New York and Indiana, was elected Secretary, of the Section for the ensuing year.

Southern California University Law School.

Hastings College of Law of the University of California.

Creighton University Law School. University of Maine College of Law. South Dakota University College of Law.

St. Paul College of Law.
Trinity College Law School.
Washburn College School of Law.

CHARLES NOBLE GREGORY, in his address as President of the Association of American Law Schools, said, in part, that the Association was formed at Saratoga nine years ago, and its articles were shaped and adopted at three somewhat stormy meetings at which he presided; that its declared object was "the improvement of Legal Education in America, especially in the Law Schools." He expressed his gratitude at being chosen President of the Association after the lapse of nine years, and thought it not inappropriate to review briefly its past history, to see in what measure its objects had been met. He showed that 35 schools, out of a total in the country of 96, were represented at that first meeting; but the 35 schools included about two-thirds, and the 61 not represented included only about one-third, of the law students in attendance in schools in the whole country. He showed the moderate standards set as to preliminary education -at first a high school course of no defined length, later of four years; as to law studies required, at first two years, and after 1905 three years. He traced the attendance and incidents of the meetings held, and gave a brief account of the kindred Society of Public Teachers of Law in England and Wales, just organized and then analyzed the statistics of Law Schools in the Association and country for nine years past.

It was shown there are 108 law schools, with 18,069 students, in the country at present, an increase in nine years in number of schools of only oneeighth, of students of nearly one-half; also the increase of students in schools represented at the first meeting of the Association was 1,429, and in other schools 4,124; that the schools, which included two-thirds of the students of the country, having formed this Association had, after nine years, only about one-fourth of the growth, and the outside schools, which then had one-third of the students, had enjoyed three-fourths of the growth; also that when the Association was formed substantially 26 per cent. of the students enrolled in the American Law Schools graduated yearly; that now substantially 22 per cent. graduated yearly, a change less than might have been anticipated.

The speaker said: "We do not seem to be affecting the body of students in our law schools as we had hoped." He showed that, of the 35 schools at the first meeting, 21 had increased their attendance, 1 had been stationary, and 13 had diminished their attendance in nine years, and in the latter number are included some of the largest, oldest, and most favorably situated schools; that the greatest number of schools and students is not in New England and the Middle States, but in the North Central division, beginning with Ohio and extending through Michigan and the Dakotas; that the schools existing nine years ago and now members of the Association had then about 50 per cent. of the total number of law students in the country, now about 40 per cent.; that these schools had increased in attendance about 15 per cent.. the whole body of schools about 50 per cent., so that the Association had a little less than one-third of its proportionate growth.

Mr. Gregory said: "If our standards are desirable, it is lamentable that they apply to only about four-ninths of the law students of the country and to a diminishing proportion." Yet he said he had no suggestion to make of turning backward. He said the advances in standards had been very great; that the Association must use all feasible efforts to induce other schools to come to the desired standards and cordially welcome them to membership; that the Association must cement the bonds of friendly alliance between the schools of the Association and cease certain methods of rivalry and interference which tended to impair good relations. He suggested a committee to draft a Code of Ethics for law schools, as there had been for the bar, and said: "The Association need not fear too many activities. The danger is that it will have too few." He showed, after all, that the number of law students had greatly increased in nine years as a whole, while the number of medical and dental students had most materially decreased. He spoke of the limited rewards of the teacher of law, compared with those of the practitioner, but found satisfaction in seeing one former law teacher at the head of the nation, and another chief executive of our greatest state. He said: "Lawyers, standing together, have accomplished much. It is hoped that the Association of Law. Schools of America and their faculties, even though they proceed slowly, may prove potent, not merely for their own welfare and that of the course of legal education, but for the wider and higher services of justice according to law

"The hope of all who suffer;
The dread of all who wrong;"

that enlightened justice, which the late Lord Chief Justice Russell called a prime

necessity of mankind, to which all lawyers, whether on the bench, at the bar, or in the faculties, have equally pledged the labors of their useful lives."

Following the President's address, Prof. HAROLD D. HAZELTINE, of Emanuel College, Cambridge University, England, spoke on the subject of "LEGAL EDUCATION IN ENGLAND." Prof. Hazeltine said that the paper he had prepared would take some three hours to read, and that he would therefore not attempt to give the paper in its entirety, but that he would touch only on the main points.* Prof. Hazeltine said:

I beg to thank you, Mr. President, and the members of this Association, for the honor of an invitation to read a paper on the present state of legal education in England, and for your cordial welcome this evening. My paper takes, I find, something like three hours to read, but I beg you not to be disconsolate on this account, for I shall content myself with reading to you certain portions of the paper only, and with consuming not much more of your time than the President has taken in his able and most interesting address.

As the subject which you so kindly suggested relates, therefore, only to the present and only to England, the history of legal education in Scotland, Ireland, Wales, and the other parts of the British Empire do not come within the purview of this paper; nor am I concerned, except incidentally, with a comparison of legal education in America and on the Continent.

In looking at the present state of legal education in England, I shall endeavor to give you in the first place a simple statement of the organization of the various law schools; then, secondly, a few words on the education of students before they begin their legal studies; thirdly, some account of the courses of study at the various law schools, and the examinations, degrees, and distinctions that follow such courses; fourthly, a summary description of methods of instruc tion and study at present employed in the schools; and, lastly, a hint as to the prob

*Prof. Hazeltine's address will be printed in full in the report of the Meetings of the Association of American Law Schools, which will be published in the reports of the American Bar Association for 1909.