Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 14.pdf/73

 46

advisable to enlarge the terms of this bill to in clude all United States judges and all members of either House of Congress, and all persons appointed or elected to any of those offices? With certain provisions of the bill, however, we cannot agree. Sections nine and ten, which impose the penalty of death upon " persons associating themselves together or assembling within any State or Territory for the purpose of discussing and considering means for killing any person charged with the duty of executing the Federal laws " or " for killing any chief or head of a foreign state or country, or any ambassador or minister of a foreign state or country resident in the United States," are too drastic. Such conspiracy should be punished; but the punish ment should be imprisonment, unless indeed, such a conspiracy led directly to a killing or an assault with intent to kill, in which case such conspirators might be considered rightly as ac cessories, and should be punished with the same severity as the principals. We doubt, also, the advisability of attempting, as in Sections seven and eight, to punish even express, open and deliberate approval of inten tional, unlawful and violent killing of any of the officials named in this act. Such approval is so abhorrent to practically the whole body of the people that public opinion may be left to deal with such cases; and to consider the expression of such approval as " conduct calculated to incite unlawful violence " imputes to the act a quality which, except in rare instances, it would not in fact possess. And we have even graver doubts concerning the last section of the bill, which provides that "any person who shall openly and deliberately advocate the violent overthrow of all govern ment whatsoever,, and who shall openly and de liberately declare himself against the enforcement of any and all law," shall be imprisoned. The wording seems too broad. To declare " against the enforcement of any and all law " is, by itself, an act coming well within the right of freedom of speech; and such declaration, even though coupled with the advocacy of " the violent over throw of all government whatsoever," seems an idle vaporing ill-calculated to lead to action, rather than — to quote the words of the bill — "a menace to the Federal laws and to the good order and well-being of civilization."

The attention of the council of one of the eastern Bar Associations has been called recently to the acceptance by members of the legal pro fession, from a Title Insurance Company, of re bates of a certain percentage of its bills for services in the examination of any title received by it from such attorneys. It is clear that any practice by which an attorney allows a client to pay for services performed by some one other than the attorney himself, and then puts in his own pocket part of such fee without the knowl edge of the client, is not in accordance with the right standard of professional duty. That stand ard imposes the nicest regard of the client's in terests, and demands that the relations of the attorney to his client shall be absolutely open, and free from even the suspicion of sharp dealing or dishonesty. We cannot believe that such a prac tice as that referred to above is prevalent; but if it is prevalent or bids fair to become so, it would be well for Bar Associations to stamp it at once with strong official disapproval. NOTES. Two members of the same Bar circuit in Eng land are Mr. Richard Eve and Mr. Adam Walker. When the former desired to become a Queen's Counsel, or to "take silk" as the ex pression is, he wrote, according to custom, to the Seniors on his circuit to see whether they had any objection to his application to the Lord Chancellor. Mr. Walker's reply to the letter was as follows : Mv Dear Eve : You may take silk or a fig leaf. I don't care (Eve took silk.) Adam.

Colonel Webster, the father of Daniel Webster, was a farmer, and his son's spare hours were spent in work upon the farm. Daniel's teacher remonstrated with him for coming to school with his hands in such a filthy condition, telling him that if this continued he would be punished. The next day there was no improvement, and when summoned for punishment he was told that, if he could find one other hand in the whole school that looked as badly, he would be let go. " I can," was the quick response, as he held out his other one.