Independently of these, there are law schools, however, whose only requirement of the student is the payment of the necessary fees. Recently a graduate of one of these appeared before one of our board of examiners, and his entire ignorance of law was only equalled by his scant knowledge of correct English and the rules of grammar. And yet he had a diploma and a degree, which of itself in some states would have entitled him to be enrolled as a member of our profession.

I would like to see a uniform law in operation throughout this country, requiring all law schools to have as near as may be a uniform course of study, a uniform time of study and uniform requirements for graduation, and another uniform law that a law school diploma should give to the holder no rights except to entitle him to an examination for admission to the bar by the board of examiners in the state where the law school has its domicile.

Every candidate for admission to the bar should be a citizen of the United States, for who else can conscientiously take the oath to support the Constitution except a citizen? If a foreigner resides in this country, and desires to remain a foreigner, do not let him have the rights that alone belong to those owing allegiance to our flag.

I regret that the efforts to have an annual conference of state boards of law examiners was not successful, because I find from the records that there was but one meeting, that of 1904 at St. Louis, for I believe that if such conferences are held annually, and all or many of the states are represented, that more would be done in a practical way for the cause of legal education than in any other way. Certainly only through such meetings can there be any uniformity of examinations.

Previous to the Louisiana Constitution of 1898, our examining committee was appointed by the Supreme Court annually, and always of new men, reappointments not being favored except at long intervals. During the course of about fifteen years, I had the honor of being appointed on three different committees, but I must say as to them, and I presume it was equally true of the others, there was no uniformity of system or method of examination.

Soon after the adjournment of the American Bar Association last year, I endeavored to arrange for a joint meeting of the Association of American Law Schools and of the section, but was unable for want of encouragement to accomplish anything in that line. I suggest the appointment of a committee of the section to consider the advisability of one joint meeting next year with the Association of Law Schools, with the committee of legal education of the association, and with the state boards of law examiners if a conference thereof is to be held next year as I hope it may be.

The course of our secretary in inviting justices of the highest courts of each state, representatives of law schools, whether belonging to the association or not, and boards of law examiners to attend and take part in our meetings, should be continued, for I believe that in a very short time they will appreciate the importance of our work and be glad to assist in it by their presence and counsel.

We have now in Louisiana a very stringent criminal statute against any one practicing as a lawyer who has not been admitted to the bar. This, however, was not in existence in my early days; otherwise my career might have been somewhat modified, and perhaps to my benefit.

There is one very good provision to the Louisiana law which prohibits any student from coming up for a second examination where he has before failed unless he has studied again for six months. These six months ought to be extended to one year, and ought to be surrounded by such safeguards as to make it a certainty that the required time has been spent properly, in earnest study, either in a law school or an office.

With these few desultory remarks, I must close this very imperfect address, and my parting word of advice to law students is: Go to a law school, take the full three-year course, study in an office in the meantime, watch the actual trial of cases, and whether you are required to do so or not take an examination before your state board before feeling that you have finished the study of law, and, if

you find at the end of three years that you are not fully equipped and inform

ed, study longer, and do not be in haste to become a member of the bar.

A paper entitled "Requirements for Admission to the Bar in Great Britain and Her Possessions and on the Continent of Europe," written by Edward S. Cox-Sinclair, Barrister at Law, London, England, was read by Henry H. Ingersoll of Tennessee.

The paper prepared by Andrew McMaster, Advocate, Montreal, Canada, entitled "Regulations Governing Admission to the Bar in the Province of Quebec, Canada," was read by Charles Duchane of Louisiana.

On recommendation of the Committee on Nominations, George M. Sharp of Maryland was elected Chairman, and Charles M. Hepburn of Indiana was elected Secretary of the Section for the ensuing year.

IN

N THE last number of the American Law School Review (May, 1910) appears an article upon "Law Instruction in La Salle Extension University." The statement in it that the text-books made the basis of correspondence work in law in that institution have been edited by me requires an explanation, not only in justice to myself, but to those writers and teachers of law who have done work for this series of books.

About the beginning of 1909 a proposal was made to me by a Chicago publishing firm, largely engaged in the sale

of books by subscription, to edit a twelvevolume legal work, treating the principal branches of private law in a clear, simple manner, designed to afford an explanation of them for the benefit of persons not lawyers and to be readily comprehensible to those reading without professional guidance. The work was intended by its projectors to be sold by subscription principally among clerks. bankers, brokers, real estate and insurance agents, farmers, business men, and other classes of persons generally, who might have an intelligent interest in law

either from the standpoint of citizenship or of their special occupations, and it was hoped that it might also be found useful as an elementary reference work by lawyers not having access to large collections of books. The subsequent use of the work for the purpose of preparing students for the actual practice of law by correspondence was wholly unthought of. I undertook the editorship of such a work, and secured the co-operation of a number of teachers in American law schools, by whom most. of the articles were written. The general scheme of the work and the detailed directions to the writers, which were followed by them, carried out the purpose outlined above, and no other. In May or June, 1909, the original publishing firm was dissolved, and the contracts for the publication of the work were assigned to another publishing organization, in which a member of the prior firm had an interest; the work of the writers and editor proceeding as before. Near the end of the year 1909 the work was purchased from this concern by the DeBower-Chapline Company, of Chicago, a publishing corporation whose principal stockholders were also largely interested in the La Salle Extension University, which gives courses in a considerable number of subjects by corrospondence, among them law, both for purposes of business and of practice. At this time substantially all of the articles for the work were written, most of the editing had been done, and about half of the work was actually in type. There was nothing in the contracts with either the editor or the writers of the work that restrained the publishers from using the work for any purpose for which purchasers could be found, or from selling the copyright outright, if they saw fit; and the work was so far advanced at this time that it was not

practicable to abandon it, without heavy financial loss to all concerned, even if this could have been done without breach of contract.

The DeBower-Chapline Company added two supplementary volumes to the work, one containing an index, and the other matter prepared by Mr. James D. Andrews upon certain topics not included in the original plan of the work. It was understood that there should be no joint editorship, and that Mr. Andrews should have no responsibility for my part of the work, nor I for his. The purchasers of the work very properly agreed that no representations should be made that the work was prepared especially for correspondence study, or that the editor or writers believed in or approved of such a method of studying law as a preparation for actual practice. A frank exchange of views upon the subject of the study of law by correspondence took place between the present publishers and myself. They understand that I utterly disbelieve in the possibility of adequately training men by correspondence study for the practice of law, and that I have expressed and shall continue to express this opinion, both publicly and in official correspondence. This view I believe to be shared by most of the writers associated with me in the preparation of these volumes, and, had the work at the outset been designed for correspondence study of this character, many of the present contributors to it could not have been secured. What is here said of course has no reference to such instruction for purposes of business or citizenship, but only to it as a method of preparing lawyers for practice.

This statement is made to correct any possible erroneous inferences from the connection with the work of either its contributors or editor.

John K. M. Ewing, of the New York bar, 60 Wall St., New York City, has created a new system of conducting trials in the Moot Court of Law Schools. Speaking of the System, Mr. Ewing says:

"This is a new system to be used in the trial of cases in the Moot Court of law schools. Under the system now in vogue in most of the law schools of the country, a statement of all the facts of the case is supplied both the attorneys for the plaintiff and defendant, with the result that each side is thoroughly familiar with the details of the opponent's case. They are completely apprised in advance of all the difficulties with which they have to contend, and are therefore enabled to so shape their own evidence and the testimony of their own witnesses to such an extent that the outcome of a trial depends solely upon the caliber of the particular attorney's imagination, all of which is totally at variance with the conditions met in a court of law. At no time in the real prosecution of a case does the attorney for the plaintiff or defendant know perfectly beforehand the case against him; it is only the general proposition that he can have any knowledge of.

"Learning his opponent's case bit by bit, by questions and answers, appreciating when to interrupt and object as the case unfolds, noting in passing what facts are to be controverted, what facts are to be overlooked, marshaling his own witnesses, and bringing out by a series of pertinent questions the material facts of the case, is the real experience of the attorney in a trial of a case. It is this atmosphere and these surroundings from which the most valuable experience can be secured, and this system is designed to conform as nearly as possible to the actual conditions met with in a trial of a case in our courts.

"In the working of the system it is contemplated, but not necessarily requisite, that all the members of the school will take part in the proceedings of the court, and by these means actually experience, and become more familiar with, the handling of a case at a trial. The senior classes will in all cases be the attorneys of record, the members of the junior classes the witnesses in the case, and the freshmen or the lower classes serve as jurors. The 'facts' of each case, all of the evidence and 'knowledge of the witnesses,' are printed on separate sheets of paper, bound together in the form of a tablet, and are to be given only to those persons designated as the proper parties to receive them.

"For instance, on sheets of paper marked 'For the Plaintiff's Attorney' are printed the names of the parties in the case, all of the facts known to the plaintiff, a list of plaintiff's witnesses, and an outline of their testimony, and in regular form all the papers which may be offered in evidence by the plaintiff.

"On succeeding sheets of paper marked 'For the Defendant's Attorney' are printed the names of the parties, all of the facts of the case known to the defendant, a list of the defendant's witnesses, and an outline of their testimony, and in regular form all the papers which may be used as evidence by the defend

-ant.

"Both the attorneys for the plaintiff and defendant should be instructed to detach from

the sheets of paper supplied them the exhibits, in order that the same may be offered separately in evidence and indentified by witnesses from the marks on the margin.

"On succeeding and separate sheets of paper, each of which is marked for the various witnesses, are printed in sufficient detail all the facts of which that particular witness has any knowledge, with directions thereon to the witness in regard to the disclosing of the facts stated therein.

"The actual workings of the system will be as follows:

"The judge presiding at the Moot Court I will assign those students who are to act as attorneys, and note their names upon a memorandum supplied for that purpose. He will then tear from the tablet all those papers marked 'For the Plaintiff's Attorney' and give them to the individual designated. He will then do the same in regard to the individual designated as defendant's attorney. He will next indicate those students who are to act as witnesses, note their names upon the same memorandum, tear from the tablet the sheets marked for the various witnesses, and give them to the individuals designated.

"The attorneys in each case must then proceed with all the necessary preliminary steps, bringing the matter to trial. The jury will be chosen in due form, and all the preparations made, according to the Code provisions in effect in the particular locality. The plaintiff's attorney will then proceed with his case, calling as many of his witnesses as he cares to and in any order he thinks best; he may or not, as he chooses, offer in evidence the various exhibits. The defendant's attorney will then present his defense. Both attorneys may, of course, make the usual objections and motions, and the same must be passed upon by the trial judge, and a final disposition made of the case as in the regular practice.

"An appellate court is optional, depending upon the extent to which the system is developed in the various schools.

"As far as possible in each case, a short outline or history of the real case after which the particular case is modeled will accompany the papers, from which, by comparison at the close of the trial, the student attorneys may learn wherein their case was won or lost.

"The success or failure of this system will depend to a very great extent upon the degree of interest and enthusiastic co-operation exercised by those students taking the part of the witnesses, and it should therefore be urged upon them, and they should be in some measure required, to be thoroughly familiar with all the details supplied them in their memorandum, so that, in answering the various questions put to them, they will not be at a loss for an answer, or make a misstatement of facts.

"Approximately one hundred of these cases will be prepared, modeled after reported cases, each one of which will have as its main or turning point the application of a settled proposition of law. Suggestions are invited, to the end that improvements may be made in the preparation of these cases."

܀܀܀

The phrase "The Army Service Schools" is the official title for the military university at Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas, which com