careers as the result of actual ignorance of the ethical requirements of the situation."3 My own experience as a member of the bar, and especially in a court of last resort in the hearing of disbarment proceedings, has convinced me that there is much truth in that statement.

In more than half the states of the Union the state bar associations have adopted a code of ethics. The first was adopted in Alabama, December 14, 1887. All the others used that largely as a basis until the adoption by the American Bar Association of its Canons of Ethics; and that contained many of the fundamental principles found in the Alabama code. Since the adoption of this latter code in 1908 most state associations adopting codes have modeled theirs after the national one. It is to be hoped that in the near future such a code will be found in every state and that an applicant for admission to the bar will be required as a prerequisite to take an oath that he will be guided and controlled by its essential principles; that a wilful violation of them shall justify disbarment.

Some there are who insist that the field of ethics and the law should be the same. Jeremy Bentham entitled one of his great books "A Treatise on Morals and Legislation." One of his reviewers has stated that he might have called it "Morals or Legislation."4 Blackstone's definition of municipal law was "a rule of conduct commanding what is right and prohibiting what is wrong." As to substantive law,

21 Green Bag, 273.

4 Palmer, The Field of Ethics, p. 42.

this is generally, and ought to be, true; law necessarily deals with external matters-the relation of one man to others. It is objective, while morals may operate upon a man subjectively. The consequences of the act operate upon the character of the man himself. The law may not deal with falsehood or hypocrisy if it affects only the person who is the falsifier or hypocrite, and yet those acts may exert a powerful influence upon the man himself. Whether we believe in the utilitarian theory of morals as urged by Bentham, Austin and John Stuart Mill and do right simply for selfish reasons, or are actuated by different principles, there can be no question that it is our duty to do certain things because they are for the public good. The only question is, what is the highest public good and the best method of accomplishing it? 5

3. Legal ethics generally.-Ethics is the science of human conduct. Public morality is a matter of education and development. A code of ethics should be based upon actual experience and should attempt to set up definite ideals of conduct evolved from such experience. Any code of legal ethics must be approved by the leaders of that profession. It is difficult for any lawyer to follow a higher code of morality than his competitors. Generally, he will act and think like those with whom he comes in contact. Our ideals of conduct vary with different ages and countries.

Every trade and profession has its own standard of conduct. In Ancient Greece it was taught that

56 Michigan Law Review, 471.

stealing was not wrong; it was only condemned if found out. In many localities, especially in our great cities, even at this date, it is thought right by the local leaders of the political parties to colonize voters-the supreme effort always being to conceal from the public authorities their wrongdoing in this regard. The newsboys and bootblacks are said to have their codes of business conduct.

In Ancient Rome lawyers were held up as a favored class standing as the ministers of justice and the oracles of the law. The old ideal of the lawyer as the assistant of the courts and the friend of the helpless is still advocated to a greater or less extent, but the change in the practice of the law in recent years has made his work of such a nature that he is no longer solely the scholar and orator, but now must be a student of business affairs. To his knowledge of the law he adds that of business, so that he may be competent to advise from his office, without going into court, the great business interests of the day.

He may never argue to a court or jury, but may devote his time to adjusting debts, drawing contracts, construing statutes, negotiating settlements, and bringing about or preventing legislation; nevertheless, with all this he should retain the ideals of his profession.

It is vital that the legal profession should, through its various organizations, stand for the highest ideals. If the day ever comes when the leaders of that profession think more of winning a lawsuit or the acquisition of money than they do of right and

justice, then its leadership and influence would necessarily become harmful. In the legal profession, as in all other walks of life, its members learn only by "line upon line, precept upon precept." It is an old but true maxim that "Character is a bundle of habits." Every law school, every bar association, every court, should assist in upholding the standards of the profession. Legal ethics should be taught, not alone in the law schools, but most effectively by the personal example of those in the everyday practice of the law.

General rules laid down for the guidance of the profession are most helpful, but no rule or set of rules will determine an attorney's duty in every case. If there be a statutory rule in the jurisdiction in which he is practicing on any given question, that, of course, must be controlling and any attorney in the United States should also hesitate and seriously consider before clearly violating or disregarding any authoritative rules laid down by the American Bar Association or his own state association. Every member of the bar is in some sense morally bound to follow the rules laid down for him by the organized bar.

The specific statement of the principal duties of the members of the legal profession by the codes of the various bar associations will be most beneficial. They will furnish an authoritative standard by which every lawyer, when in doubt as to the conduct he should pursue, may be safely guided. The law student, also, will by these codes be furnished at the beginning of his legal studies the ideals that

should remain with him through his entire professional career."

4. Standard of admission to the bar.-First, and perhaps as important as any duty devolving upon the legal profession, is that of exerting its united influence so that only those who are honest, intelligent and adequately prepared should be admitted to the practice of the law; that only those who retain and uphold those characteristics shall be permitted to remain as practitioners.

Practically everyone now agrees that no one should become or remain a member of the profession unless he is a man of good moral character, but there is not the same unanimity among the members of the bar as to the legal and educational qualifications required before one can be admitted. Frequently it may be heard stated that in the early history of many of the states the leaders at the bar were men who never had even a fair education and obtained practically all their knowledge of the law after they began its practice. We are cited to such exceptional cases as Lincoln and other leaders of fifty or seventy-five years ago, with which every old lawyer is familiar, as proving that men could be great lawyers without education in the schools. Conditions now are widely different from those of that time. Everything else being equal, the young man who has had a college education and regular course in the law necessarily stands a better chance of reaching true success in the practice of the profession than one who never had an opportunity for this prelim

68 Columbia Law Review, 546.