tee on Professional Ethics." The by-laws of that association were amended at the same time by adding the following, viz.:

The Committee on Professional Ethics shall communicate to the Association such information as it may collect respecting the activity of State and local Bar Associations in respect to the ethics of the legal profession, and it may from time to time make recommendations on the subject to the Association." (Vol. 38, A. B. A. Report, pp. 140 to 147.)

The adoption of substantially the same Code of Legal Ethics by Bar Associations in thirty-eight of the United States attests increasing interest in the subject, cordial co-operation in securing uniformity of action, and the excellence of the Canons.

The initiative of the American Bar Association and the harmonious work of this and other associations have defined for the guidance of the whole profession standards of conduct that formerly were observed, or disregarded, as the conscience of individuals might prescribe.

In our own State the final authority of the Court of Appeals makes the Canons obligatory.

These results could not have been obtained if the different associations had, for any reason, insisted each upon originating its own Code.

Uniformity in standards of Legal Ethics throughout all the United States is no less important than is uniformity in the varied branches of substantive law.

Moreover the Code so generally approved deserves the adherence it has received. It is beyond question the best Code of Legal Ethics that has been framed.

The study, the criticism, the time given to its formation and mentioned in the report made at Portland in 1907

(Vol. 31, pp. 684-756) are only part of the elements of its origin. Special examination of the literature of legal ethics was made and special consideration given to the practical effect of the different rules.

The Code adopted is an epitome of the essentials of the subject. It summarizes what may fairly be said to result from centuries of discussion.

In a former report your committee presented the view that "the best ethical standards of the profession should be maintained; that before standards can be maintained they must be definitely declared; that after they are declared and generally agreed on by the profession, their enforcement must be gradual and that the best way to enforce them is by action of Bar Associations, of Law Schools and of Law Examiners applied to members of and applicants for admission to the Bar."

Your Committee still entertains this view.

It is not thought that this Association should attempt a compulsory enforcement of the Canons, or scrutinize in detail their application to the professional work of individual members of the Bar.

These matters receive adequate attention from other competent bodies. The Association of the Bar of the City of New York, for instance, has a committee that gives unremitting attention to the correction of professional delinquencies.

The Committee on Professional Ethics of the New York County Lawyers' Association, of which Mr. Charles A. Boston is the efficient chairman, and one of your Committee is a member, gives practical construction and effect to the principles of our Canons by answering questions submitted to it upon the ethical propriety of professional conduct in concrete cases.

The publicity given to such practical construction and application of the Canons is widespread and has excellent effect as an educational factor. This is illustrated by the fact that in a recent examination paper propounded by the State Board of Law Examiners of Maryland, one of the questions proposed to and passed upon by the New York County Association committee was used and by the fact that the officers of the Section of Legal Education of the American Bar Association contemplate securing the publication and wide circulation of all those questions and answers for ethical instruction of law students throughout the country.

Your Committee considers that work of this kind, founded upon the Canons adopted by this Association, deserves cordial commendation.

Your committee recommends the adoption of the following resolutions:

Resolved, That the Special Committee on Legal Ethics be continued and that the Executive Committee be authorized, in its discretion, to take such action as may be requisite to make it a standing committee.

Resolved, That the Committee on Legal Ethics consider and report to the Association what is practicable and desirable in respect to incorporating the "oath of admission" appended to the Canons of Ethics, in the qualifying oath taken upon, or preparatory to, admission to the Bar.

That said committee ascertain the attitude of Law Schools and Bar Associations in this State and, in its discretion, outside the State, toward the subject of Legal Ethics and co-operate with other Committees in making the Canons of Ethics effective, and communicate to the Association such information as it may collect in respect to the ethics of the legal

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PUBLICATION LEGAL NOTICES 47

profession and from time to time make recommendations on the subject to the Association.

Thomas H. Hubbard, of New York:

Mr. President, I move that the report be accepted and the resolutions adopted.

The motion was duly seconded and carried.

The President:

Report of the Committee to investigate the Publication of Legal Notices.

Henry Crofut White, of New York, read the report of the committee as follows:

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PUBLICATION OF LEGAL NOTICES

To the New York State Bar Association:

Your Special Committee on the Publication of Legal Notices, Statutes, and other public matter, reports as follows:

The members of the Association will recall that the subject which the Committee was originally appointed to investigate was the frequent designation, by certain courts, of newspapers having no or practically no real circulation, as the papers in which publication was to be made of summons, citations, and other like notices; and that the field of the Committee's inquiries was extended to include a consideration of the publication in newspapers, generally, of statutes, jury lists, terms of court, etc.

A consideration of the media of publication of some six thousand notices of various kinds, examined by us; about three hundred replies received from attorneys in all parts of the State, in response to the written inquiries of the committee; and information derived from other sources disclosed the very real existence of the suggested evil in the counties of New York and Kings, but probably in no others.

As it at first seemed desirable to supplement the information already at hand with certain additional facts, conferences were held with the clerks of the said two counties, who promptly offered to furnish any reasonable reports desired, which offer was accepted and scrupulously fulfilled.

It gives the committee great pleasure to thus publicly recognize the willingness of those gentlemen, Mr. Schneider of New York county, and Mr. Devoy of Kings county, to thus co-operate with this Association for the public good.

As a result of all of these investigations, it was deemed advisable to take up this question with the Appellate Divisions of the First and Second Departments, and it is difficult sufficiently to express our appreciation an appreciation which will be echoed by the whole Association

of the instant courtesy and assistance extended by their Presiding Justices and by such of the Associate Justices. as participated in the conferences.

Despite the natural reluctance of Appellate Courts to participate in appointments or selections, Mr. Justice Ingraham, upon being apprised of the extent of this abuse and furnished with the evidence thereof, at once expressed his conviction that the situation should be promptly and effectively met by the adoption of a rule, providing for publication only in papers of approved character and circulation, and undertook the labor of presenting the subject