the defense of one Courvoisier, a Swiss who was accused of killing his employer, Lord William Russell, in 1840. It was a crime of great atrocity. During the trial of Courvoisier he confessed his guilt to his counsel, Charles Phillips. Thereupon Mr. Phillips consulted one of the judges in the case as to his duty with reference to continuing the defense. He was advised that it was his duty to remain in the case and present every fair argument that arose from the evidence, and proceeded in accordance with that advice.19 The consensus of opinion among the members of the legal profession is that Mr. Phillips was right in remaining in the case; that a lawyer defending a criminal he believes or knows to be guilty is justified in using, as Baron Parke has expressed it, "all fair argument arising on the evidence."

In this country a lawyer is not obliged to accept a retainer either in a civil or criminal case unless he desires. The practice, however, is different in Great Britain, as to those members of the profession who under the English practice present the cases in court. The ethics of the bar in Great Britain requires an advocate to accept a retainer in any case in which his services are requested. Lord Erskine in 1792 stated, "From the moment that any advocate can be permitted to say that he will or will not stand between the Crown and the subject arraigned in the court where he daily sits to practice, from that moment the liberties of England are at an end. If the advocate refuses to defend from what he may think of the charge or of the defense, he assumes the char19 Sharswood, Legal Ethics, p. 103.

acter of the judge; nay, he assumes it before the hour of judgment, and in proportion to his rank and reputation puts the heavy influence of perhaps a mistaken opinion into the scale against the accused, in whose favor the benevolent principle of the English law makes all presumptions, and which commands the very judge to be his counsel." 20 In the year 1913 there has been a very vigorous discussion in England over this practice when certain prominent members of the bar who were also members of Parliament were retained to defend persons charged with violations of the law in connection with a corporation that was undergoing investigation by the House of Commons. The general consensus of views of the legal profession in Great Britain was that these advocates could not refuse to follow the rule which had been "handed down to us by long generations of men who have left the reputation of the Bar of England for integrity, fearlessness, and impartiality unrivaled in the world." 21 In this country, as we have said, an attorney is not required to accept a retainer in any case unless he desires, but if he has accepted the defense of one accused of crime, then it is his duty to use all fair and honorable means to present the defense of his client so that he may not be deprived of life or liberty "without due proc ess of law."922

14. Relation of lawyers to the public.-A lawyer must have business in order to live. May he solicit

20 22 State Trials, 411 (Eng.).

21 Law Times (London), June 21, 1913, p. 181.

22 11 Law Notes 191.

business or advertise for it in any way? In England the rule is that a barrister should not advertise, even by means of a card.23 In this country, especially in the smaller towns or cities, it is considered entirely proper to advertise by handing out a simple card with the place of business on it, or to insert such a card in the public press or legal directories, but general solicitation of business is usually considered unprofessional. Some, in discussing this question at the present day, assert that the traditions of the legal profession that advertising is improper is founded upon the fact that advertising was originally used only by charlatans and impostors." The lawyer's personality has much to do with his success. It is entirely proper for him to seek a good location for his business, with suitable furnishings for his office. It is considered professional to extend his personal acquaintance in every proper way, by joining clubs or other organizations. Generally speaking, there is no objection to an attorney who makes a specialty in a certain branch of the law announcing that fact on his card, but in so doing he should simply make a statement of that fact and nothing more. It is highly unprofessional, however, to solicit business under such headings as "A bad debt collector," or "No fees if unsuccessful." Neither is it within the limits of legitimate law practice for lawyers to visit the hospitals and other places where can be found persons recently injured and solicit their business. It is equally improper to procure business by

23 29 Canadian Law Times, 267. 24 17 Case and Comment, p. 441.

indirection, through persons employed for that purpose, whether connected with real estate firms or trust companies or by advertising directly or indirectly through the newspapers to the effect that the lawyer has been very successful in the conduct of a case of great magnitude, or self-laudation in the newspapers as to the importance of the cases that the lawyer has tried or the positions he has held.25 It may well be doubted whether a lawyer will get any enduring standing at the bar by any self-advertising. His experience and ability as a lawyer will sooner or later become known to those who are seeking legal services. Especially is this true in smaller cities and sparsely settled communities, and in the long run, even in the large cities, a lawyer's reputation will almost certainly without advertising become familiar to those who might wish to employ him.

15. Fees. This is one of the most difficult subjects upon which to lay down any definite rule. In ancient Greece and Rome the lawyer was not supposed to charge anything for his services. What he received was a gratuity or present from the client. In Great Britain at the present time the rule is that counsellors, advocates and barristers have no right to charge and enforce the payment of compensation for their services, as they are considered purely honorary. A different rule prevails there with regard to attorneys and special pleaders below the bar. In the United States the rule is, in most jurisdictions, that attorneys have full power to contract with their clients for compensation and to compel the payment

25 § 27, American Bar Association, Canons of Ethics.

by a legal action.26 Judge Sharswood, in his lectures on legal ethics, stated that in his judgment it had been neither to the honor nor profit of the bar to depart from the ancient rule in regard to the charging of fees. He seemed to think that the practice as it had obtained in most of the states of this country tended to fill the ranks of the profession with pettifogging, custom-seeking, money-making lawyers, which he said was "one of the greatest curses with which any state or community can be visited."' 27 The general consensus of opinion in the legal profession at the present time is that Judge Sharswood was mistaken in his views on this subject; that a lawyer, as well as anyone else, should receive his reward in the payment of reasonable fees, rather than depend upon the gratitude of his clients; that men in the legal profession will not do their best work on the latter basis; that it will almost inevitably result in a class of rich lawyers, or require the payment by the state for legal services.28

While it is sometimes difficult or impossible, wherever practicable there should be a frank and definite understanding at the time of the employment as to the amount of compensation to be received by counsel. All persons are apt to estimate their services too high rather than too low. In fixing attorney's fees, care should be taken not to unduly magnify the value of the services as well as not to belittle them. A client's wealth will never justify a charge

26 3 American & English Encyclopaedia of Law (2d ed.), 414. 27 Sharswood, Legal Ethics, p. 148.

28 20 Green Bag, 92.