which is so general as to embrace conditions throughout our country, and therefore seeks to present all the obstacles which may exist anywhere to the swift and inexpensive administration of justice, almost necessarily fails to give a proper perspective and to take proper account of what may have been accomplished in particular communities. In this great metropolitan community the poor of the city should understand, and the newspapers that deal with this question should not fail to make clear, that there has been a tremendous gain in administration; that under the legislation of 1913, in connection with our municipal courts, there has been a reduction of expense in great degree; that litigation is far more conveniently proceeded with now than ever before; that justice is swifter than ever before it was supposed would be possible. There are now opportunities for arbitration, for conciliation, for direct approach to the Justices-opportunities of which any poor man, by walking into a municipal court, can at once avail himself in order to secure a fair and reasonable disposition of his claim. I am very much gratified-I regret that I did not have the pleasure of hearing Judge McAdoo's paper at what has been said with regard to the Municipal Courts by the other speakers. Mr. Hamilton has emphasized the importance of our appreciating the tremendous progress that has been made.

While this progress has been made, there are some things which need attention. The fact that so much has been gained should not obscure the necessity for other remedial measures. The great difficulty still exists in connection with the poor man that he cannot pay for the expert advice that he needs in order that he may understand his rights. Our opportunities for conciliation have been so recently provided that the ordinary poor man does not know how to avail himself of them, The very exterior of the court house is forbidding to him. He cannot understand just how he can go about this business of availing himself of the provisions made for him with regard to direct

conciliation, or arbitration, or appearing in his own right. He needs advice. He needs what the rich man needs, a chance to go to a good lawyer and talk over his case and get sound and inexpensive advice. It is there that the Legal Aid Society comes in and provides for the worthy litigant the opportunity that he seeks. I have always held that it is the primary duty of the Bar- these lawyers who are so busy in their offices that they cannot have a department where they can see the poor that it is their duty to support the organizations which provide the means for the poor to obtain counsel.

Mr. Benedict, in his question, put his finger upon a very sore spot in the administration of justice in this city in a Municipal Court. We will never make any progress unless we appreciate fully the difficulty that exists,— where the difficulty, the defect, is, and the way to cure it. Too often our judges, in respect of any matter that comes before them, stop thinking about it when they have rendered judgment and delivered their opinion. Not so the poor litigant. He is interested, now that he has obtained judgment, in getting his money. One of the hardest things that the Legal Aid Society has had to do, as I am advised by its attorney, is to make the poor litigant understand the difference between judgment and money. When a poor man gets a judgment, he sometimes thinks the clerk of the court is to pay him the money, his wages, or whatever may have been the subject of his claim, at once. Here we have a serious defect in the present system by reason of the relation of the City Marshal to the matter.

I am told by the attorney for the Legal Aid Society that the judgments of the Municipal Courts are exposed to contempt on the part of those who know that upon the appearance of the Marshal they have only to say that their property has been assigned, to a wife or to some relative, whereupon the Marshal reports nothing found. The attorney says that in one of his branch offices where executions were issued amounting to

$1,832, out of all those executions only about $100 was collected. And I am informed that many of these judgments were collectible, if the proper procedure had been taken. How is the poor man to get his debtor examined in supplementary proceedings? He needs to have some system by which City Marshals shall be held to a strict accountability. I am told by the attorney for the Legal Aid Society that complaints have been filed against four City Marshals who have in their possession no less than fifteen executions, the major portion of which carried the right to a body attachment, and upon these executions no report whatever has been made.

We must look after the swift collection of money wherever a judgment has been rendered, by proper judicial processes, as well as to the determination of the right to the money,-always recollecting, as Mr. Hamilton so well pointed out, that the importance of the case to the litigant is the true criterion of its actual importance, and the importance to him is measured by the need of the money, not simply by an official declaration of his legal rights with respect to it.

There has been so much improvement in respect of the administration of justice in our Municipal Courts, that I am quite sure that if we take these difficulties separately as they come to light and deal with them, and if the Bar understands the great importance of the work of the Legal Aid Society, and supports it loyally so that it can supplement the work of the courts by giving advice, and by providing appearances for poor and worthy litigants, then we shall, as effectually and fully as we can, remove any just ground for criticism with respect to the administration of justice in the case of the poor. Let it always be understood that in criticising the courts with respect to any sort of delay in connection with litigation or the actual recovery of amounts that may be due, we are never for a moment challenging the fairness and impartiality of our tribunals, for the Bar and our citizens must always have it

impressed upon them and accepted as a fundamental proposition that in America justice is no respecter of persons.

Mayer C. Goldman, of New York:

May I say just a word? I believe that the progress of the Magistrate's Court and the Municipal Court

The President (interposing):

The hour for adjournment has more than arrived, gentlemen, according to the regular order, and the discussion upon this subject, it was provided, should cease at this time, to be resumed at 2:15, if necessary. There appear to be other gentlemen who wish to speak and I think perhaps it would be suitable that we adhere to our schedule.

Mr. Goldman:

Then may I say a word further at the resumption of the discussion this afternoon?

The President:

Certainly. This subject is scheduled for discussion not only this morning, but this afternoon at 2:15 o'clock, if anybody desires an opportunity to discuss it.

Elon S. Hobbs, of New York:

Before adjourning, may I ask whether the scope of the program this afternoon will include not only the subject of the very poor, but of the poor who have lost their investments and may be considered a little higher up than the very poor? In other words, I would like to bring a concrete matter to the attention of the Association, bearing upon the Interborough tangle.

The President:

I hardly think that is in order, but you may bring it up this afternoon if there is an opportunity for it.

We will now take a recess until 2:15.

The President:

AFTERNOON SESSION

SATURDAY, January 17, 1920.

Gentlemen, on account of the crowded state of our calendar, which has been caused or brought about in some unusual way, we really have very little more time left to devote to the subject which was before us at the hour of adjournment. At that time Mr. Goldman had the floor and was about to speak, and I will now accord him the privileges of the floor.

Mayer C. Goldman, of New York:

I shall endeavor to observe the admonition of the chair to be brief. The attacks now being made upon the administration of justice in our courts are not novel. The administration of justice in all countries has been a source of constant criticism for centuries. In the remarks this morning by Judge McAdoo, Judge Levy, Mr. Hamilton, and Judge Hughes, particular attention was paid to the evils growing out of the cost of legal procedure and the law's delay. It seems to me that there is a phase of this very important subject which might be touched upon for a few moments; that is, with regard to the discrimination which exists primarily in the criminal courts against the poor man. Perhaps it is somewhat far fetched to criticise the judges or the district attorneys for that condition. The evil is inherent in the system itself. I would like to call particular attention to the discrimination against the poor man because of his failure to get competent and suitable counsel. Men familiar with the conditions in the criminal courts know that under the present system the poor man, dependent upon assigned counsel, who serves without compensation, is at a great disadvantage. I think in the large cities particularly that the character and type of men who are usually assigned as counsel in these cases are not calculated to insure adequate