Page:North Dakota Law Review Vol. 1 No. 4 (1924).pdf/5

Rh and good temper are essential to give it effectiveness, for the object is to reach the public quite as much as the newspaper.

“It would be a good idea for State Bar Associations to consider means of getting their qualified members to undertake in their several communities the task of thus promoting a better understanding and better thinking on the subject of the administration of justice and those who are intimately concerned with it.”

Up to and including the 27th of February, the following States had rejected the child-labor amendment to the Federal Constitution: Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana (ratified by House), Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wyoming, 26 in all. The total legislative votes for, were 868, against, 2,665.

Some interesting incidental facts are disclosed by the U. S. Census, at least, they would have been interesting in the event the amendment had been ratified and enforced to the extent of the exact language of the amendment.

For instance, there were 7,877 soldiers, sailors and marines, who had passed the physical and mental examinations of the U. S. Army and Navy; there were 6,427, who has successfully passed teachers’ examinations and were teaching school, but were not eighteen years of age; there were 201 making a success as writers, reporters and editors; there were 2,689 musicians and teachers of music; there were 721 employed in the arts, 22 engaged as aviators, 1,000 graduated nurses, and 1,300 photographers; all of whom might have been compelled to go to school or remain idle.

The following, from Hon. F. T. Cuthbert, of Devils Lake, Chairman of the Committee on Compensation and Fees, is in reply to several inquiries that have come to the Committee since the adoption of the Schedule:

“It seems there has been some doubt with certain attorneys concerning the schedule with reference to foreclosures, which we regret. The Committee did not intend any ambiguity when it wrote this schedule regarding foreclosure by advertisement. It was the intention of the Committee, and understood by all, that the foreclosure fee by advertisement would be $25.00 plus one-half of the statutory fee by action, or one-half the statutory fee before the amendment. As Chairman I have taken this matter up with the entire Committee, and the Committee has