communicating ideas to others, and in thus influencing the opinions and actions of their fellow men, and the practical type, which is interested neither in the arrangement of facts nor in the communication of ideas, except as a means of achieving concrete results in the way of business or politics or some form of human endeavor. From the first type come our physicians, our engineers, our accountants, and our consulting experts of every kind. From the second type come our teachers, our preachers, our journalists, and our jury lawyers; from the third our merchants, our manufacturers, our railroad men, and our consulting lawyers. The mental qualities which fit a man for success in these three groups are quite different; but those that fit a man for success in the different callings within any one of these groups are pretty nearly the same.” 1

The two groups of lawyers thus described are by no means the only ones to be noticed in the legal profession. Another group is that of the court lawyers who seldom or never try a case before a jury; another of those who practice mainly in the courts of criminal jurisdiction. A large one is of clerks in large offices who work for other lawyers, and receive fixed salaries. Another is of specialists, who pursue some single line of practice, such as patent litigation or admiralty proceedings. Another is composed of men especially familiar with international private law; another of those who particularly profess public international law. Another group consists of teachers of law, some giving all and more but a part of their time to this.

In these and other ways the American lawyer has a 1 Yale Alumni Weekly, Vol. XXV, p. 699,

freedom and range of activity quite unknown to his English brethren. He is more independent and selfcontained.

Unlike the English solicitor, he can address the court. Unlike the English barrister, he can consult with his clients, and his business commonly comes to him directly from their hands. In England, on the other hand, the barrister's income finds its sources in the good opinion or the favor of the solicitors.1

The American lawyer thus combines the functions of the English barrister and solicitor, the advocate and proctor in admiralty, and the French avocat and avoué. He has the right to engage in the preparation of cases and also in their argument. He can draw the pleadings, and then explain the issues to the court. He can

appear in the courts of the United States, as well as of his State. He can attack or defend a patented invention, or a literary copyright, as well as sue on a promissory note.

But practically he is apt to confine his activities mainly to a certain line of practice. He may be chiefly employed either as a trial lawyer, or as an office lawyer. The trial lawyer may be best known for his connection with criminal causes, or in civil causes; for his success before the jury, or before a judge. The office lawyer may seldom or never enter the court room. His time may be devoted to advising this or that action on the part of clients in a case where they are uncertain as to their legal rights. He may be largely a draftsman of

1 See Jenks, Short History of the English Law, Boston, 1912, p. 203,

contracts or conveyances and wills. He may give himself wholly to questions incident to the management of one or more large interests.

A lawyer often also drifts into the position of a trustee of an estate, or of an adviser as to the conduct of a trust. Most of those to whose care the estates of the dead are committed are not lawyers, and need frequent counsel from a lawyer. The division of law known as Equity is specially conversant with trusts of different kinds. Some lawyers give their attention particularly to equitable rules of practice; and partly for that reason are selected themselves as executors, administrators, or receivers, or trustees. Those for whom they may thus act have a special security by reason of the control which courts of equitable jurisdiction have over lawyers, in summary proceedings. Because, if a lawyer is made a trustee, it is probably in part due to his professional character, the court may deal with such a one, should he become a defaulter, as a lawyer who has violated his official obligations to the State. They can enforce restitution by summary proceedings of arrest, or require it, after proper censure, on pain of disbarment.

Practice in the courts of probate and insolvency engages the attention of some city lawyers almost exclusively. A lawyer, as above stated, is often named as executor, or assignee in bankruptcy or insolvency, and such a position is apt to involve or indirectly lead to considerable remunerative labor of a professional character,

The courts of probate, under the laws of mortality, make a turnover, two or three times in every century, of the whole capital in the country, held in private ownership. They also share with courts of equity a large, standing, and continuous jurisdiction over permanent testamentary trusts of a public or charitable nature. Their functions in settling the rights of the State to exact inheritance taxes are of large importance.

Few considerable estates are settled without more than one occasion arising which calls for legal advice, and may result in important litigation, either in these courts or, on appeal, in the higher courts of general jurisdiction. To give but a single instance, the Probate Court of Cook County, which includes Chicago, annually disposes of over ten thousand claims against estates, about a tenth of which are contested. speaks well for the composition of the court that there are seldom more than twenty or thirty appeals taken.1

It

The great extension since 1866 in the exercise by Congress and the State legislatures of powers previously lying dormant has created almost a new division of practice: that before public boards and commissions or commissioners. They deal with large interests, and lawyers of the first rank often appear before them. They also often have counsel of their own.

There have always been, in our larger cities, lawyers practicing mainly in the Courts of the United States. Another group, centering at Washington, consists of 1 Michigan Law Review, Vol. XIII, p. 670,

men who spend most of their time in pressing claims against our own or foreign governments.

The excessive mass of American legislation is the mother of innumerable questions of statutory construction. New problems daily arise from it, which call for new studies in new directions.

The litigation in new fields which is sure to follow the return of peace after the world war of 1914-1919 will be enormous. The courts will be kept busy in dealing with great questions of constitutional law. International law, both public and private, will present grave problems for judicial settlement. So will the rules to govern our Courts of Admiralty. The United States also has assumed a new financial character. It is, at the present time, the monetary center of the world. Many commercial disputes of a kind that formerly would have been determined by foreign courts will now be brought before those of our country, both State and National.

Arbitration, commissions of inquiry, quasi-judicial, and judicial proceedings to adjust the differences of nations will become more common than before the war. The methods of conducting them will be revised, and it will be for the lawyers to do this.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration, organized under the Conventions adopted at the Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907, opened a new forum for the settlement of disputes between independent governments. All the great Powers and several of the