The Lawyer as an Officer of the Court an agent, shortly after the happening of an accident, to visit a stricken person, or the members of his family, and give his advice, to the end that he may obtain litigation in relation thereto. There is no question in my mind but what this abuse can be readily remedied by an enactment of proper statutes, and by the setting of a high aim on the part of the Bar Association on this subject, and by creating sentiment amongst the members of the profession in relation to this subject. I have known instances where as many as half a dozen lawyers have sought personal injury business at the same time under circumstances just mentioned. Imagine for a moment the moral effect that such acts on the part of the members of the profession have upon the public. In itself it is sufficient to lower the standard of the profession in the eyes of the public. Imagine, also, what effect it has for a lawyer to either directly or indirectly suggest the pro curing of false testimony for the purpose of winning a lawsuit. Such a lawyer may be instrumental in having his client's case go to a jury and in securing a verdict; he may also be amply com pensated financially for his work, but his client knows that he is not reliable; that he is not trustworthy; that he is not honest; and even though he may call upon him again if he is in a tight pinch and needs services of a similar nature, he has no respect for his honesty and he has not been made a respecter of the profession. Clients have a general im pression that if they only entrust their cases to the right counsel, they can accomplish any end. Such an impres sion is, in my opinion, at the root of the failure on the part of the pub lic to properly respect the lawyer in general, and prevents the public from holding that profession in the esteem to which it would otherwise be entitled.
77
There is another practice in the pro fession in vogue which I consider sub versive to the administration of justice, and which requires remedy, and I refer particularly to the practice of large corporations, and particularly public service corporations, in obtaining affi davits of witnesses to accidents im mediately after the happening of the injuries. It has been my observation that these affidavits are drafted by agents of the companies, and do not present a fair statement of facts, and are signed by the witnesses without scrutiny and without proper examina tion. When once these affidavits are signed they are used for impeachment purposes, and the testimony of witnesses who would otherwise be truthful is compromised and practically annulled. This practice ought to be obviated by the enactment of statutes by the state legislature, and I believe that a law passed, prohibiting the use of such affidavits so obtained for impeachment purposes, unless the statements are ob tained by some public official, after due notice to the other party interested, would remedy the evil. On the other hand, our courts and our judges have always occupied the highest moral standard in the eyes of the public. Seldom, if ever, do we hear of any charges against a judge for either partiality or abuse of office. There is a reason for this, and the primary one, in my opinion, is the fact that the judge exists solely to promote the adminis tration of justice. He is a purely public official and owes an obligation to no one outside of the public. He draws his compensation from the public treas ury; he is no client's tool, nor is he subservient to the dictates of counsel. Like the goddess of justice, he holds the scales blindfolded and administers the law according to the dictates of his
