William Righter Fisher, of Pennsylvania:

I rise to say a word for those who are striving to become lawyers. I highly appreciate the value of the law schools as a means for preparing men for admission to the Bar. I also fully recognize the value of a very thorough and complete preliminary education, which, it seems to me, as has been said by one of the previous speakers, really exceeds in importance the later and necessary technical study of the law.

I think that the young men who aspire to positions in the profession of the law are very largely sinned against by the methods now in vogue through which they obtain their training as prospective lawyers. My sympathies go out, and have always gone out, very much more warmly towards them than towards. either the community at large or the Bar; and I should like to call the attention of the committee which has in charge the matter of attempting to frame standard rules for admission to the Bar to one particular feature of their case. My experience has beenand I have had considerable opportunity for observation, and acquiring what may be called an intimate knowledge of the young men in the state of Pennsylvania who are seeking to become lawyers that almost invariably these students of law are young men of very generous and fine impulses. They start out in life with highly laudable ambitions and purposes; they are seeking not only to advance their own interests, but they are striving, many of them, after something which is a great deal nobler and higher; their minds are stirred by something which is altruistic; they dream of rendering a service to the public. In other words, they are generous, lovable young men ; but we deceive and mislead them.

With all the acknowledged value of the law school as a means of preparation for the Bar, it is not in and of itself sufficient. Think for a moment of the position of the average young man, who is a graduate of a law school of the highest efficiency, and who has adequately fitted himself for creditably passing the severest state board examination which can be at present practically set for him. He passes these tests and asumes to start out

in the practice of his profession. He is without any attachment whatever so far as professional connections are concerned. I am speaking now of the average young man. He is almost wholly without practical preparation for his work. He has no useful command over the tools of the profession. He has been thrown out upon the world, where, after long preparation, he is to earn his living by professional work, unfitted to render any efficient service which will entitle him to well-earned remuneration. He is without a mentor at his side, without any attachment professionally with actually working lawyers. Is there any reason we should wonder at his falling into devious and unprofessional ways?

I have reflected much upon the subject. It has for many years been painfully thrust before me. What was said here this afternoon by the gentleman from Montreal' has very much impressed me. I do not know what the results may be, here in the province of Quebec, from the method of legal education outlined by him; but the young man who has gone through with such a course, made up of office work and law school instruction, certainly ought to have acquired, with a broad legal education, fair practical command of his professional tools, and ought to be inducted into the profession with such attachments professionally as will give him good initial standing for beginning his practical work.

It seems to me that any standard rules for admission to the Bar ought to require, among other things, not only a broad, systematic, scientific study of the law, but they ought to require, as well, from all applicants for admission as practicing lawyers, some adequate apprenticeship under the tuition of a practicing lawyer, and some sort of professional attachment whereby the student may be personally safeguarded, and drilled in the use of the tools which it is essential he should have at his command before he can render any service to the community for which he is entitled to a compensation in money.

Gentlemen, are we not doing wrong to the young men? Are we not misleading them? We are encouraging them to spend three, or four, or five, or six, or more years of their lives in acquir

ing an education which is supposed to fit them for the practice of the law, and yet we bring them into the profession helpless and unattached, and unfit so far as any real practical work is concerned. I think we need to address ourselves to this aspect of the subject, rather than to that of detective espionage and suspicion." H. A. Bronson, of North Dakota:

I have been interested exceedingly in the remarks of the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I am a member of the Board of Bar Examiners of North Dakota. I have also taught law in a law school as an avocation, being also a practicing lawyer, for practically ten years. I have listened this afternoon with considerable interest to the address delivered by Mr. Lightner. I am impressed that there never was a time when the ideals of the American lawyer were greater than they are today. I am further impressed from visits to this American Bar Association for the past five years with the fact that this Section and the Bar as a whole are attempting to do all that they can to further an approximation to those high ideals.

As a member of the Board of Bar Examiners of North Dakota it has been my experience that of the candidates seeking admission to the Bar the deficiencies are revealed largely in a lack of fundamental training and in a lack of being equipped for entering upon the actual practice of the law, and also in a lack of an efficient method for determining the moral qualifications of the candidates. In North Dakota we have an opportunity to examine candidates from all of the eastern universities, and we have noticed that the absence of practice court work, which we discussed here last year, is something that needs attention. I think it is a demonstrated fact in the State of North Dakota that the requirement of a fundamental training, the requirement of a long term of legal education, has produced distinctly a better type of lawyers; and I deny the indictment, if it be an indictment, that Mr. Lightner makes, that the lawyers of today are not respected, either for moral delinquencies or otherwise, and I say that in North Dakota there never was a time when the lawyers stood in higher repute in the eyes of the people. There was a time there when men

could be admitted to practice law merely on motion and without any particular legal qualifications. But we have progressed gradually, requiring a certain term of study, and then requiring two years in a law school, or two years spent in a law office, and now the requirement is three years of study in a law school or its equivalent in a law office. The fundamental learning has also been gradually changed, so that now it is necessary to have at least a high school education.

I want to say that my experience in North Dakota has demonstrated beyond peradventure that the requirements of a better fundamental knowledge, of a longer term of service, has unquestionably brought us a number of men of greater legal acumen, and also I maintain that a high standard fundamentally in general knowledge, and a high standard in legal education tends to bring before the Board candidates who are of greater moral stamina, because certainly we ought to be willing to admit, and the history of experience certainly tends to demonstrate to us, that ordinarily a man, who is well qualified in the fundamentals, and who has devoted a good length of time to legal study, is perforce a man of greater moral stamina than one who has never attained or done the like, other considerations being equal.

To me the great inquiry is: How may a board of Bar examiners inquire with reference to the moral fitness of candidates? How may methods be adopted, so that the young candidate seeking admission to the Bar may be qualified to enter immediately upon the practice of law? It seems to me, therefore, that the remarks of the gentleman from Pennsylvania are in line at this time, that some method of practice courts, pursued perhaps at institutions for the study of law, would be a matter for proper consideration. L. J. Nash, of Wisconsin:

Mr. Chairman, I am not at present a member of any board of law examiners, although I was a member of the state board in Wisconsin for seven years. There happens to be no Wisconsin gentleman in the room as far as I know, and I would like to speak on this subject if I may.

ing an education which is supposed to fit them for the practice of the law, and yet we bring them into the profession helpless and unattached, and unfit so far as any real practical work is concerned. I think we need to address ourselves to this aspect of the subject, rather than to that of detective espionage and suspicion." H. A. Bronson, of North Dakota:

I have been interested exceedingly in the remarks of the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I am a member of the Board of Bar Examiners of North Dakota. I have also taught law in a law school as an avocation, being also a practicing lawyer, for practically ten years. I have listened this afternoon with considerable interest to the address delivered by Mr. Lightner. I am impressed that there never was a time when the ideals of the American lawyer were greater than they are today. I am further impressed from visits to this American Bar Association for the past five years with the fact that this Section and the Bar as a whole are attempting to do all that they can to further an approximation to those high ideals.

As a member of the Board of Bar Examiners of North Dakota it has been my experience that of the candidates seeking admission to the Bar the deficiencies are revealed largely in a lack of fundamental training and in a lack of being equipped for entering upon the actual practice of the law, and also in a lack of an efficient method for determining the moral qualifications of the candidates. In North Dakota we have an opportunity to examine candidates from all of the eastern universities, and we have noticed that the absence of practice court work, which we discussed here last year, is something that needs attention. I think it is a demonstrated fact in the State of North Dakota that the requirement of a fundamental training, the requirement of a long term of legal education, has produced distinctly a better type of lawyers; and I deny the indictment, if it be an indictment, that Mr. Lightner makes, that the lawyers of today are not respected, either for moral delinquencies or otherwise, and I say that in North Dakota there never was a time when the lawyers stood in higher repute in the eyes of the people. There was a time there when men