Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

Certainly, if our Association is sufficiently attractive and energetic to get in these men, they are going to be more valuable and really desirable and more fruitful to us than if they were compelled by some Act of the Legislature to become members.

And the Legislature itself, if we go down and say we are incorporated and represent all the members of the Bar, will say: Of course you do, because by Act of the Legislature they become ipso facto members of your Association; therefore, it means nothing.

The other thing, according to my mind, in that connection is this-and that is a question on which none of the speakers has touched. As I understand it this Act of the Legislature is to create a corporation whose members shall have a monopoly in the practice of law in the State of Maryland. I also understand there shall be a requirement that the members shall pay a certain amount of dues, to be fixed by the directors, and to be paid by the membership of that Association into the treasury for the sustenance of the organization. Of course, if there are no dues and no money the Association becomes practically useless.

Therefore, we have a legal question as to the power of the Legislature to create a corporation and give its members a monopoly in the practice of a profession; and secondly, as to the power of the Legislature to take away property, even though small in amount, of the members of that Association, and the members of that profession who may be unwilling to contribute to the support of that movement.

I think that we can do a great deal more real good at this time, subject, of course, to change on mature consideration after listening to the presentation of other views if we would lower the standard we have fixed for membership as far as it might be advisable and make a drive to make every member of the State a member of our Association, and also adopt some

machinery by which we would be able to bring to the attention of every member of the Bar what we are really trying to do.

Of course, these trips are delightful but they are expensive. Many members of the Bar throughout the State, young members, cannot afford to come to Atlantic City and spend a few days. They are not willing to make the sacrifice to enable them to do it. So that we ought to adopt some kind of machinery, even if they are not members of the Association, to bring to their attention the objects of the Association and educate them along the lines of its advantages, and bring them into sympathy and co-operation with our Association.

The other question as to the discipline of the members as far as Mr. Bowen's suggestion is concerned as to the regularity of the members of the Grievance Committee having authority to prefer charges against member, and what may follow if they are not afterwards sustained, I think the Chairman of the meeting has aptly and wisely shown that has no real force. I really believe what we need is more education as to the proper standards. That is only to be gained by discussion and by argument and not merely by adopting more rules.

For instance, I believe in New York they have a committee where any member of the Bar who is doubtful as to the propriety of any given course of action, may submit to the committee the question which concerns him and thereupon that committee makes a ruling which is published in the Law Journal. If we had something of the machinery of that type, and encouraged members of the Bar to use it, it might be very fruitful in inculcating and establishing a higher standard of legal ethics.

I believe this is really a serious matter and my chief objection to it is really, I think, we ought to get away from the idea that more is to be gained from machinery.

Mr. Lauchheimer: The purpose of this discussion has been subserved, in part at least, by the remarks of Mr. Bowie. The committee does not wish to commit the Association to any stand on the matter, but wishes the matter to be fully discussed first, and we shall be very glad to have the members voice their dissent in as vigorous terms as has Mr. Bowie. We want expression of opinion, and the fullest expression of opinion, so that if the Association at this time or any future time desires to take any action on the matter it will have the benefit of the various views of the members of the Association.

Eugene O'Dunne: I wish to register my dissent, not in as vigorous terms as Mr. Bowie, but to register my dissent. I wish to direct your attention to Section 3, or whatever it is, of the model bill, so called by misnomer. I desire to call attention to that and suggest, if it be in order, that a committee be appointed to draft and model this bill so it shall be efficient. We reserve the individual right to cuss the Courts in which last analysis, in our lucid intervals, we ultimately have the fullest confidence, and our profession is built on that theory to which we all subscribe.

I do not think any of us, with the exception of the committee who drew this bill, are prepared to leave for determination to a Board of fifteen governors controlled by a political majority of the membership of the lawyers of the State at large, who can practice law in Maryland. I know it would be the strongest kind of a committee which would go down to Annapolis to prohibit the passage of such a bill as suggested here as a model bill.

I do not want a committee of the Association to pass on my qualifications as to the right to practice law. I am not willing to allow even my fellow members of the profession to pass on other people's qualifications to practice the law in this State,.

but I am willing to leave it to the sole determination of any Court.

I do think we ought to increase the membership of the Association as suggested but not by a bill which should make it obligatory to any man admitted to the Bar to become ipso facto a member of this Association. As Mr. Armstrong has said, we are opposed to the encroachment on our personal liberty and I think we are equally opposed to those who force honors on people who do not want them. I think that clause should be remodelled to rather suggest that upon admission to the Bar a man should be ipso facto entitled to membership in the Bar Association if within thirty, sixty or ninety days after admission to the Bar he wishes to become a member of the Association the opportunity is open to him. Then he could register in the same way, for instance, as automobiles are registered between now and September. If he failed to register in that time then he would fail to avail himself of the advantages which the members of this Association extended to him.

There might be a serious objection to forcing an obligatory membership in this Association on members. I have heard, though it is not supposed to be spoken on the floor in open session, that this partnership was in possession of some liquid assets, and if it were incorporated it might undertake to declare a dividend. In that sense strict prohibitionists with a membership in this organization forced on them by law might cause them to become conscientious objectors. For all these and other reasons I object.

Harry M. Benzinger: I do not agree with my friend Bowie that we should lower the standard to allow anyone to come into this Association. I think the Association ought to be composed of representative men as it is today and not let anybody and everybody come in. I think we ought to try to make it a universal thing, but do so by reason of the men themselves and their conduct.

As far as incorporating is concerned I do not see any necessity for incorporation. I do not see any advantage in it at all. It means, Mr. Armstrong said, without expense. If it is going to be run without expense then we are not going to have anything. That is as certain as can be, you cannot have anything without expense. And if it is going to be run at an expense I agree with Mr. O'Dunne, it should not be compulsory to one to come into the Association. Plenty of men do not want to join an organization of any kind. They are willing to paddle their own canoe. I see no reason in the world, except as Mr. Armstrong properly said, to protect a committee whose duty it is to investigate the conduct of members of the Bar, and to prosecute them or what-not. We have gone along all these years and we have gotten rid of the men at the Bar who are really objectionable with a very few exceptions. Take the Bar as a whole I think it is really representative and I absolutely see no necessity in the world for bringing everything. into centralization, which it means. It means the American. Bar Association will utimately control the Bar Association. of the country, and I am opposed to it.

Thomas Foley Hisky: I am very sorry that the three gentlemen who have spoken are all in favor of the bill, and that no one has spoken in opposition.

So far as a committee is concerned to conduct the investiga-tion of members of the Bar when charged with unprofessional conduct and present the matter to the proper Judicial authority for action, I think the Bar will agree that that will be a good thing.

I think you will remember that some years ago a bill, with which your humble servant had something to do, was proposed in relation to disbarment. It provided that where a man was disbarred in one Circuit the other Circuits should be notified and the Judges in the other Circuits were expected to act with

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »