is some legal policy requiring a deputy commissioner, then I want to know whether I am at liberty to understand Mr. Dawson suggesting that the deputy will be some one of our people available for the purpose of handling the matter such as our adjustment?

Miles M. Dawson, of New York:

As to the last question, which I will try to answer first, I assume that would not be the case, that no deputy for the adjustment of claims would be appointed merely on the suggestion of an employer. I assume each deputy appointed would be an actual employee of the commission and paid by them. A deputy for the purpose of making the payment to your employees would have to go through the commission under this law. I should think there would be no objection at all to somebody actually selected by you, if found to be entirely satisfactory, and giving bonds and keeping books in a proper manner for their investigation. I should say personally, from personal experience in the organization of mutual aid associations, that the wisest course for you to follow would be to have a committee appointed for the adjustment of all the claims, to be composed of one representative of the employees, one person suggested by you and a commissioner or deputy commissioner. I think you would find that would work out like your relief association and that the return would practically always be confirmed by the commission, whereas, if you left it for adjustment to the commission, it might be quite frequently delayed. I think it would be in practice much the safer and wiser course to follow, and it is provided. for in the act.

William Beverly Winslow, of New York:

Mr. President, I learned something at a meeting last week that I did not think of. I was at a meeting

of manufacturers of about eighteen persons, and after they had finished the business for which they were called together I said to then, “Have you folks considered what is going to be the working of the new compensation law. If you have not I would like to have about five minutes. to tell you about it." They considered me their counsel, although I am not. I am counsel for several of them, but not for the association. One of the large manufacturers in this city replied for himself that it was not going to make much difference to him, for after the first of July he was not going to have any married men working for him. You heard the figures Mr. Dwight and Mr. Hotchkiss gave you on the subject of total benefits. I can beat that twin story of Mr. Dwight's and run that up to over $60,000 with an eighteen-year-old child and a father and mother dependent. A lot of people will be like the gentleman in the meeting who said it didn't bother him so much because he did not intend to have any married men in his employ after the first of July. I am offering that as a new suggestion.

Frederick B. Campbell, of New York:

Mr. President. I move that the thanks of the Association be tendered to these gentlemen who have come here this afternoon and given us these most interesting addresses.

The motion was duly seconded and carried.

The President:

Miscellaneous business.

Adelbert Moot, of Buffalo:

Mr. President, I have in my hand a letter addressed to Mr. Ansley Wilcox, on behalf of the Erie County Bar Association, extending an invitation to this Association to meet in Buffalo next year. You will remember the Asso

ciation had a very delightful meeting there three years ago. The Mayor and the Chamber of Commerce have also united in extending invitations to have the Association meet there next year. I would like permission to present these invitations.

The President:

Permission granted.

The following is a copy of the letter:

"ANSLEY WILCOX, ESQ.,

January 29, 1914.

c/o FREDERICK E. WADHAMS,

42 W. 44th St., New York City.

DEAR MR. WILCOX.-This will serve as your authority to act as a delegate and representative of the Erie County Bar Association at the meeting of the New York State Bar Association in New York City. The Erie County Bar Association wishes to extend an invitation to this Association to meet in Buffalo next year, and we trust that you and the other delegates, Mr. Carlton E. Ladd and Mr. Joseph G. Dudley, will see that this is pressed. I have forwarded formal invitations from the Mayor and from the president of the Chamber of Commerce to Mr. Wadhams, the Secretary of the State Bar Association.

Very truly yours,

E. H. LETCHWORTH, Secretary, Erie County Bar Assn."

Virgil K. Kellogg, of Watertown:

Mr. President, on behalf of the Committee on Legal Publications, I have certain matters that I desire to bring to the attention of the Association, some of which were elicited by resolutions adopted at a meeting of the Kings

County Bar Association, and others which were called to my attention in performing the functions, however inadequately, as chairman of the committee. We lawyers, I suppose it goes without saying, are frequently, most of us too frequently, too little concerned with our own personal affairs in our offices, and I assume very few members of the Bar really know the source and the reason why the payments are made by them for what is known as the Combined Official Series, and it is to correct certain small abuses that have crept in, and present certain other abuses that may creep in that I am delaying the Association now. The Combined Official Series, as the members of the convention, of course, will understand, consist of the Court of Appeals Reports, the Appellate Division Reports, the Miscellaneous Reports, the Session Laws and the Advanced Sheets. Under the law in its failure to properly cover the entire scope of this matter as it exists to-day, five separate contracts have to be made in order to provide for the publication of the official series, which is really but one matter. These five contracts have to be made by four separate and distinct individuals having no relation with each other. For instance, under the law as it exists the contract for the publication of the Court of Appeals Reports is made with the publisher by the State Reporter. The contract for the publication of the Appellate Division Reports is made by the Supreme Court Reporter. The contract for the publication of the Miscellaneous Reports is made by the Miscellaneous Reporter, and the contract for the publication of the Session laws is made by the Secretary of State. It so happens that in the evolution of things we find ourselves with these four sets of contracts, covering that which is but one publication, expiring at entirely different periods, that is, the expiration of the contract for the publication of

the Court of Appeals Reports expires at a different time from that for the renewal of the contract for the Appellate Division Reports, and so on. The statute requires that four sets of these contracts shall be made for a period of five years, the other contract made for the publication of the Session Laws by the Secretary of State for a period of two years, and it goes without saying that while the statute requires that the person making the contract on behalf of the public should go through the formality of advertising for bids, yet with four out of the five contracts in the hands of an individual, or a concern, no other person can successfully compete with a bid for the publication of either one of the sets unless they are content to assume the position of making the publication of that which they bid for if the publication should be awarded to them, at a loss. I must say, so far as reporting the decisions are concerned, I have heard no criticism; so far as the printing of the book is concerned, I have heard no criticism. It seems to have been done in an efficient and satisfactory manner, but, on the other hand, it certainly is bad business that a condition of affairs should exist under the approval of this body, because it could not exist if the body did not approve, under which a competitive bid can not be made, and under which the public, and by the public, of course, we mean the lawyers of the State, can not have the benefit of a competitive bid. Therefore, the committee,— and I may say, as far as that is concerned, I am the only member of the committee who has met to take action, the other members are Dean Alden, of Buffalo, and Mr. Webb, the Corporation Counsel of Rochester, the latter of whom says I have authority to announce that he will concur in any action I propose to take I say, in view of the circumstances, we are going to recommend that the statutes of the State be