Page images
PDF
EPUB

V. L. Page, Hillard, Denny and Vaughan Gary rendered splendid service.

Respectfully submitted,

I. P. WHITEHEAD, Chairman,
ROBERT L. PENNINGTON, Bristol,
N. S. TURNBULL, JR., Victoria,
GEORGE B. ROBEY, Fairfax,
AUBREY G. WEAVER, Front Royal,
R. GRAY WILLIAMS, Winchester,
J. W. FLOOD, Appomattox,
LEMUEL F. SMITH, Charlottesville,
LUCIAN H. SHRADER, Amherst,
THOMAS H. WILLCOX, JR., Norfolk,
ASHTON DOVELL, Williamsburg,
J. M. HOOKER, Stuart,
W. W. BEVERLEY, Richmond,
JAMES M. LEWIS, Tappahannock,
WALKER A. WILLIAMS, Pearisburg.

REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO COOPERATE WITH LIBRARY BOARD.

To the Virginia State Bar Association:

Your Committee met on June 28th, with all members present, and after hearing a statement by Dr. H. R. McIlwaine, State Librarian, respectfully recommends:

(a) That the membership of the Special Committee to Co-operate with the Library Board be increased to five; (b) That the Committee be instructed to report to the 1929 meeting upon the condition of public records in the State, both State and local, and more especially as to housing, physical condition, indexing, mutilation, and inks, papers and typewriter ribbons; and

(c) That the Committee also report a resolution to be presented to the following General Assembly, recommending legislation upon such phases as may be specified.

MORGAN P. ROBINSON,

Chairman.

[blocks in formation]

CHAMBERLIN-VANDERBILT HOTEL,

OLD POINT COMFORT, VIRGINIA, August 1, 1928,

3 o'Clock P. M.

Honorable Robert R. Prentis, of Richmond, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia and Chairman of the Judicial Section, called the meeting to order.

The Chairman: Gentlemen, the first thing that I shall do will be to appoint a committee, in accordance with the usual custom, who will suggest officers for the ensuing year. This is not a close corporation, as much as the evidence seems to be against that statement, because any one is free to make any other nomination that he desires to make, but we think it will be best to have some of our leading men confer and then suggest to the meeting nominations for those offices.

I cannot serve any longer as Chairman of the Judicial Section. The reason for this is, to my own mind, perfectly apparent.

There may be a great many other reasons which are equally apparent to the body, but the reason I wish to express is this. As you know, the General Assembly has provided for the organization of the Judicial Council, and I am directed to appoint and organize that Council. I do not think that it would be appropriate or lead to the best results if I were to continue at the same time to serve as Chairman of the Judicial Section of the Virginia State Bar Association, because we want all the help that we can get. While the Judicial Council can only recommend and this body can only discuss and resolve, I am sure that I truly anticipate and express the sentiment of the Judicial Council which is to be appointed when I say that they will desire the hearty co-operation of the Judicial Section of the Virginia State Bar Association. They will not invite their antagonism, but will most heartily and sincerely invite their co-operation, their constructive criticism and their helpfulness in everything that may be attempted.

Because I expect to preside over the Judicial Council, I shall no longer occupy this chair after this year.

I appoint on that committee to nominate officers Judge Hanckel of Norfolk, Judge Browning of Orange, and Judge Gregory of Roanoke, and desire that they will confer and suggest officers for the ensuing year. There are only three. My able and faithful collaborator, Judge George Latham Fletcher of Warrenton, has been Vice-Chairman, Judge Frank T. Sutton of Richmond has been the Secretary, and I have been the Chairman. The committee will suggest the names of judges to fill these

three positions and do so at some time during this afternoon's session.

Of course it was perfectly natural, when I read the act regarding the organization of the Judicial Council, and when I knew that the Hon. S. S. P. Patteson was the patron of the bill in the House, that I should think of him as the one who should tell me and tell you what its general purpose is; and accordingly I have invited Mr. Patteson here to give us such information as he wishes to give us on that subject. (Applause).

Judge Frank T. Sutton, Jr., Secretary: Before Mr. PattesonTM commences his address I want to distribute copies of the two acts of the 1928 Legislature which are the subjects of the proposed discussion, chapters 7 and 411, Acts 1928.

(Copies of these acts, which read as follows, were then distributed.)

CHAP. 7.-An ACT creating a judicial council in Virginia for the purpose of considering and recommending needed changes in the rules of practice of the courts of the Commonwealth, and the improvement and simplification of the administration of justice, and defining its other duties, and providing for the payment of its actual expenses.

Approved February 8, 1928.

(S. B. 8)

1. Be it enacted by the general assembly of Virginia, That it shall be the duty of the president of the supreme court of appeals of Virginia, or in case of his disability, of one of the judges of the supreme court, in order of their seniority, to summon annually to a judicial council, on the first Wednesday in December, at Richmond, or at such other time and place in the State as may be designated in the said summons, not less than three nor more than five circuit judges, and not less than two nor more than three of the judges of other courts of record, and ten members of the bar of the supreme court of appeals, one from each congressional district of the State.

If for any cause the judges so summoned are unable to attend, the president of the supreme court or the judge calling the council, may fill their places by summoning any other judges of courts of record who are able to attend. It shall be the duty of every judge thus summoned to attend said conference and to remain throughout its proceedings, unless excused by the presiding judge, and to advise as to any matters in respect of which in their opinion the administration of justice in the courts of this Commonwealth may be

« PreviousContinue »