ceed first with tentative experiments under one of the other two methods, is a question upon which we may well hear more before we make haste to decide.

(Applause.)

S. L. H. Ward, of New York:

Mr. President, I move that the thanks of this Association be given to Professor Huffcut for the interesting, able and timely address we have just heard.

Leroy Parker, of Buffalo:

I second the motion.

The President:

(Carried.)

Are there any members to be elected this morning?

P. W. Cullinan, of Oswego:

Mr. President, I nominate Maynard W. Clement, of Canandaigua.

Rudolf Dulon, of New York:

I propose J. Brewster Roe, of New York, and Arthur Knox, of New York.

H. J. Cookinham, of Utica :

I propose Henry J. Coggeshall, of Waterville, and E. H. Risley, of Utica.

R. A. Gunnison, of Binghamton:

I propose James T. Rogers, of Binghamton.

Samuel H. Waddell, of New York:

I propose Edward H. Miehling, of New York, and Dennis O'Sullivan, of New York.

Henry E. Tremain:

I propose Robert Imrie, of Caldwell.

Walter S. Jenkins, of Buffalo:

I propose George A. Davis, of Lancaster, Erie county, Myron H. Clark, of Elma, Erie County, and John K. Patton, of Tonawanda, Erie county.

H. L. Bogert, of New York:

I propose Charles Van Voorhis, of Rochester.

Z. S. Westbrook, of Amsterdam:

I propose William P. Hover, of Amsterdam, and Clark L. Jordan, of Gloversville.

The Committee on Admissions reported favorably on the above names. The report of the committee was adopted, and those proposed for membership declared duly elected members of this Association.

The President:

were

We will now hear the report of the Committee on Law Reform, Mr. J. Newton Fiero, chairman.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON LAW

REFORM.

To the Bar Association of the State of New York:

The Committee on Law Reform begs leave to submit the following report:

At the annual meeting in 1899 the following resolution was adopted:

66

'Resolved, That the Committee on Law Reform be directed to prepare and present to the Governor and Legislature a memorial asking the appointment by either the Governor or by the chief judge of the Court of Appeals, and the presiding justices of the Appellate Division, of a new Commission which shall have exclusive charge of the matter of Code Revision, and be authorized to ask the

active assistance and earnest co-operation of the Bar of the State, and to adopt that plan of procedure which shall most recommend itself to the Bench and Bar. Such Commission to receive no compensation for its services, but to be entitled to its actual and necessary expenses in prosecuting the work, and the Committee on Law Reform be charged with the duty of obtaining any legislation necessary for that purpose." (See Report of New York State Bar Association, vol. 22, page 168.)

In pursuance of which the Committee on Law Reform communicated with the Governor as follows:

To Governor Roosevelt:

The New York State Bar Association, through its Committee on Law Reform, submits the following considerations, with regard to the appointment of a commission to consider and act upon the matter of revision of the Code. of Procedure.

Herewith is submitted a report of a Committee on Code Revision, made pursuant to a resolution of the Association adopted at its recent meeting. (See Report of New York State Bar Association, vol. 22, page 170 for report submitted.) The Special Committee, which consists of five members, whose signatures are hereto attached (see vol. 22, Reports, page 193), made its report to the Committee on Law Reform, by which committee it was adopted as its report to the Association at the annual meeting on the seventeenth of January. In case it is desirable, a full and complete statement will be prepared at a later date, by way of memorial, as contemplated under the resolution.

It is desired, however, at this time, on behalf of the Association, to call attention to the manner in which this question arises and to the action heretofore taken upon the subject. The movement in favor of the revision of

the Code of Procedure first took definite form through the action of this Association in 1893, and the agitation of the subject, and its consideration by the lawyers of the State, so pressed itself upon the Legislature, that in 1895 chapter 1036 of the Laws of that year provided for the appointment of three members of the Bar to examine the Code of Procedure in this State, and the procedure and practice in force in other States and countries, and report to the next Legislature in what respects the Civil Procedure in the courts of this State could be revised, condensed and simplified.

This action was taken with a view very clearly expressed at the meeting of the Association, and very strongly held by the Bar that the Revision Commission, as then constituted, should be relieved from this responsibility by reason of the burdens imposed upon it in other directions. It was at that time, and is at present, the opinion of the Bar of the State that the labor imposed upon the Revision Commission, by way of drafting bills for the Legislature and preparation of general statutes for enactment, is quite as great as that capable and efficient body of men can undertake and carry on, with proper regard to the character and importance of the work.

It was, at least, hoped, if not tacitly understood, at that time that the Bar Association of the State, and the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, as well as lawyers not connected with either of these Associations, should be consulted in the selection of the counsel to be appointed for this difficult undertaking. The bill was signed on the last day but one before the expiration of the thirty days after the adjournment of the Legislature, and, simultaneously with the announcement of its signature, the names of the present revision commissioners were announced as the counsel to act under the provisions of the

bill.

Since that time the revision commission has taken up the work of Code revision in a report to the legislature of 1896 as to the scope and plan of revision, which may possibly be deemed to have exhausted its powers under the statute. Without regard, however, to such a view which might possibly be deemed technical, the commission, in 1897, reported a judiciary law to the Legislature for enactment, and, substantially, the same law has been again presented to the Legislature at its present session.

During each of the preceding years an effort has been made, on behalf of the Bar, to prevent the passage of this act, upon the ground that it is in nowise an improvement upon the present Code of Procedure; and in almost every respect is more objectionable than the Code as it now stands. This opposition took such form, that at the annual meeting of the State Association in 1898, the committee making the report herewith forwarded, was appointed, and the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, at a later date, appointed a committee for the same purpose, which has as its members, among others, James C. Carter, William B. Hornblower and William J. Curtis.

In view of the very strong and almost unanimous opposition of the Bar, as well as of the Bench, to the revision suggested by the present commissioners, we desire to submit and urge most earnestly that such provision be made for Code revision, as shall place it in the hands of such persons as shall consult and follow the views of a majority of the lawyers of the State, best qualified to speak on the subject. In this connection it may be said that the work of the Commissioners of Statutory Revision is, except so far as relates to a necessary revision of its work, by way of careful examination and amendment of the statutes already enacted, substantially at an end, with the exception of the