The Activity of the Illinois Bar Association in Procedural Reform AN IMPORTANT conference on procedural reform took place at the thirty-sixth annual meeting of the Illinois Bar Association, held at Chi cago, April 26-7, all the state bar asso ciations having been invited to send delegates. In addition to the discus sion of reform of procedure, the subject of recall of judges and judicial decisions also furnished a topic for consideration. Thirty states responded to the request to send delegates. The discussion was opened by an able address by Horace Kent Tenney, the retiring president. It was not necessary, he said, to choose between the old common law system and an enormous code. It was desir able rather to take the wise middle course founded upon the two essentials of a short and simple practice act to be passed by the Legislature and of power in the courts to regulate matters of procedure. A great advance would be made, he thought, if the Supreme Court of the United States could be empowered to formulate a practice act for use in the federal courts throughout the country, a change that would result not only in direct benefit to litigants in those courts but would serve as an excellent example for lawyers in the various states. The spirit of the meeting was shown by the hearty applause given to a story related by Mr. Tenney at the banquet. According to his story, the relator was sitting around a courtroom one day in pursuance of our time-wasting methods, waiting for his case to come up, while two lawyers engaged in a long and tire some argument as to the soundness of a declaration. Mr. Tenney's client listened patiently to the subtleties of
the disputants until patience ceased to be a virtue, when he turned to his attor ney and said: "Why don't they let the fellow who is suing say that the other fellow is a damned scoundrel and that he is ready to prove it?" "So far as reform in pleading is con cerned," comments the National Cor poration Reporter, "that is the whole story in a nutshell." President Tenney's address was emi nently constructive, but other speeches served quite as much, perhaps, to stimu late thought. There was frequent allu sion to the unwieldy New York code, which as framed by David Dudley Field contained only 300 provisions, but which has been encumbered with amendments by the Legislature — though, said Wil liam Nottingham, the delegate from New York, it may yet be redeemed to usefulness, since a commission is now at work upon a draft of a brief and less complicated act. It was shown that Indiana has suffered in much the same way as New York, thereby "achieving a remarkable waste of time in getting down to the issue which is to be sub mitted to the court for decision." The abominations that frequently at tach to expert testimony came in for condemnation; so did the elaborate systems which, in some states, make it almost impossible for a poor litigant to take an appeal. Victor G. Gore of Michigan attacked the Chicago court procedure in criminal cases as dilatory. George Bryan, representing Virginia, declared that under the present system the right of appeal was denied many litigants owing to the great expense involved. The Chicago Municipal Court
