Mr. Augustus Jacobson, of Chicago, recently read an able and exhaustive paper before the Philosophical Society which those interested in this subject would do well to consult.

The taxation of corporations proceeds upon somewhat different principles from those which should guide legislative action in the taxation of individual property. Individuals are said to have some natural rights, though whether, in law as against the sovereign power of the State, they possess any other than those secured to them by the constitution may well be doubted.

But a corporation being the creature of law is such as the law makes it, and nothing else. If it have rights or franchises they are the creation of the law; if it have duties or liabilities they also exist and are what they are by law, and being reciprocal to the rights and privileges conferred, must always attend as a condition of their exercise. No matter what privileges a corporation may enjoy as an incident of its corporate existence by a sort of comity from the sovereign where it so exists, as a matter of right its duties and liabilities are always strictly measured and defined by law. And attached to all grants of corporate power as a condition of its exercise is the right of the sovereign to supervise the manner in which such corpor ate right is employed and reciprocal corporate duty is performed. Therefore, while taxation of individual property is permitted for public purposes in consideration of the benefits of membership in a common society which the individual enjoys, there may be, as to corporate property, not only a taxation of tangible property, but a tax upon the franchise enjoyed-not merely such a tax as is imposed at the time of its creation, but such an imposition as subsequent events and altered circumstances may warrant the law-making power in deeming reasonable.

In some of the States a tax such as that advocated, obtains with satisfactory results; and with the immense railroad systems and other interests centering in this State could be made highly productive, with no hardship to the corporations subjected to it.

There is now a widespread feeling that they do not bear their just proportion of the burdens of government to which they owe not merely the protection of their property, but their very existence. By this plan the State could see to it that they contributed their full share. But it may be asked whether there is necessity for augmentation of revenue for State purposes? To this it may be replied that it is thought resort to these methods of taxation would tend to more equality of burden, and that their adoption does not necessarily involve increase of revenue.

But it is thought also that all revenue for State purposes might be appropriately raised perhaps exclusively from corporate license fees or tax on receipts, and that this revenue might with advantage be very considerably increased.

It is expected that at the present session of the legislature an effort will be made to establish two most worthy charities-the State Industrial Training School for Girls, and the State Home for Juvenile Offenders. It is thought with good reason by some that the scheme of the first named institution should be broadened so as to include children of both sexes. There is now, with one or two exceptions (institutions said to be full to overflowing), no place where boys of tender years, innocent of crime, can be properly cared for and instructed.

These and similar institutions should be properly provided for. The experience of ages has shown that individual impulse and voluntary contribution are not sufficient to secure for the poor, the sick and the unfortunate adequate and humane provision. It is commonly said that the rich are growing richer and the poor poorer. Certain it is, that there is an immense amount of suffering, wretchedness and often resultant crime that goes hand in hand with the most obvious and opulent luxury; and discontent, deep-seated and persistent, obtains among the laboring classes. The strong arm of the State should be stretched out to aid her unfortunate children; and in no way can this aid be more effectually rendered than in providing for the little ones who must otherwise be left to grow up starved in body and mind to a life of ignorance and too often of vice. Let us have training schools and homes where the children of the poor and the unfortunate may not merely receive a common school education, but manual training, instruction in trades and the like, and he supported and cared for by the State so that these opportunities can be enjoyed.

This is not communism or socialism. It is a form of practical republicanism. It is not paternalism. If it is, then our free public schools come within the same category. By them we provide for the intellectual ailment of our children and make their support a charge upon the property of the State. But hundreds and thousands of little children never attend them because in the factory, in the shop, in the great hives of human industry, they are compelled to toil from morning to night to eke out a scanty and miserable subsistence.

Give them a chance to enjoy the advantages that are promised them. The time to reform criminals is before they become criminals. Let us have these charitable institutions where the young are provided for, and we shall save much now required for the support of penitentiaries and the administration of the criminal law, and much, too, now required for hospitals and dispensaries.

The accumulation of large property owners are not the results of their unaided effort. As has been clearly pointed out by the eminent economist, Henry George, there is an increment of value, the result of the combined efforts of all. Particularly where corporate adventure is so benefitted, may a kind of trusteeship for the general people be legitimately impressed upon its acquisitions, Created and armed with extraordinary powers pro bono publico, all that incorporated bodies of a quasi public character have they hold upon a public use and charged with a public trust, to be invoked and enforced by the State whenever in its sovereign judgment the public interest so requires. And this principle may be justly considered in determining the manner and extent of taxation of their property.

The liability of an employee for injuries sustained in the course of his employment is much more extensive in this State than in many others. It may be that it now rests on principles of as nearly substantial justice as those upon which any legislation could proceed. But the writer, with some lack of confidence in his own judgment, ventures the suggestion that this liability ought to be further extended, and that those accidents which are generally said to be part of the risks of service should impose some burden on the employer.

Upon wise considerations of public policy, it seems to the writer that where a workman or employee is injured in the service of his master, without negligence on his part either by machinery, defective or otherwise, or by the negligence of a fellow servant, the employer should be held liable.

A conspicuous instance of a case where an employee should be permitted to recover for defective machinery or appliances, where it was held he could not, is found in Wisconsin

Citing

Ballou v. C., M. & St. P. Ry Co., 54 Wis. 257,

E. St. L., P. & P. Co. v. Hightower, 92 Ill. 139.

A case where recovery ought to be permitted, though machinery was not defective, is found in new York

Sweeney v. Berlin, etc., Co., 101 N. Y. 520.

A case where recovery ought to be permitted, but was denied on account of the relations of the injured party and those through whose negligence he was injured, is Chi. & E. Ill. v Geary, 110 III. 383.

As ordinary servants have no control as to the character of machinery employed and very little means of knowledge as to its safety, and no control over their fellow workmen, or their employment, the master and not the servant should answer for the damage done by machinery and fellow servants unfit for the purposes of their employment. Thus, greater care in their selection would be secured and accidents would be less frequent.

It is understood that the law of France and Germany is as here recommended; v. 81 London L T., 388.

The writer is also of opinion that the limitation of damages to $5,000.00 for a death occasioned by the wrongful act or negligence of another is illogical and unreasonable. No good reason can be urged why a recovery should not be permitted in such cases, nor why it should in all cases be arbitrarily limited to that sum. If it be said the sympathies of juries will lead to excessive verdicts, then let the Courts exercise their power to correct this. Their judgment in the light of the facts of each case may surely be more appropriately trusted than the wisdom of the legislature to make a rule which shall answer for all cases.

It is expected that legislation will be sought this winter in the interest of greater security for titles in Cook county. By a carefully prepared bill it is sought to be provided that a party claiming title to land may, upon making a showing as to title and payment of taxes, ex parte, before a master in chancery be permitted to file a declaration or claim of title and have it recorded, which shall be unassailable, if not questioned, for three years. The great advantage of this over proceedings under the Burnt Records Act, so-called, is said to lie in its simplicity and economy of procedure. Every effort is made in the proposed bill to guard against abuses under it. If danger of spurious titles being thus unassailably assured has been successfully guarded against, then certainly all that can be urged against this measure by its enemies is that it would be brutum fulmen, ineffectual to reach the end aimed at, which is to simplify and facilitate examinations of title and transfers of land, and to strengthen titles. Those who are interested in this subject might desire to look at somewhat similar statutes in England-v.

25 & 26 Vict. Chap. 67;

38 & 39 Vict. Chap. 87;

and also a very interesting paper on Land Transfer Reform, read by Henry Barker at the annual provincial meeting of the Incorporated Law Society, recently held in York, England, 81 London, L. T. 410.

The subject is of great practical importance in Chicago, and merits very careful consideration.

The writer has not been impressed with the great urgency for reform of the Criminal Code except as heretofore indicated in the report of the committee in discussing other topics.

It is thought that the abolishment of contract labor in the penitentiaries is a step in the right direction. In devising some plan for the employment of convicts in the future, it would seem to be highly desirable that the prisoners should support themselves, and that, if possible, such of them as have families should be permitted to contribute to their support. It would also be an excellent idea to provide for and encourage a system of saving and accumulating by prisoners, so that when discharged they should have something to rely upon until such time as they could find employment. The humane tendency of modern civilization is to develop the reformatory aspect of prison life. And it is believed that the interests of society lie in this direction rather than in the development of the idea that imprisonment is a means by which public wrongs should be avenged. The deprivation of liberty is a great punishment. And as the conscience and intelligence of the prisoner are quickened, the severity of this punishment is more keenly felt.

The writer is of opinion that all criminal proceedings before a justice of the peace or police justice, sitting either to hear and determine or as an examining magistrate, ought to be instituted by summons or warrant, at the option of the prosecuting witness; and where no warrant is issued, and the defendant is held, the issue of a mittimus to be within the magistrate's discretion. And that, upon indictment, a capias should issue for the offender at the discretion of the State's Attorney. There is altogether too much punishment before conviction, particularly of the poor and unfortunate who are unable to give bail.

In any proper case let an arrest be made; but unless the alleged criminal is likely to run away, let us not imprison him until he is found guilty. If, by any chance, a mistake is made and a guilty man runs away, perhaps it might be a fortunate thing for the society which thus banishes him.

At the last meeting of the Association, the Committee on Law Reform recommended an amendment to our statutes which should limit the capacity to take by descent or will more than some fixed amount from any one decedent.

This was referred back to that committee for further consideration. If the necessity for legislation which the proposed amendment suggests has arisen, the writer is of opinion that it could perhaps be better met by the provision of the Code Napoleon than in almost any other way.

Sec. 1, Chap. 3, paragraph 913, is as follows:

"Liberalities either by acts of gift, or by will, cannot exceed moiety of the property of the disposer, if he leaves at his decease but one legitimate child; a hird, if he leaves two children; a fourth, if he leaves three or a greater number."

However, the writer does not desire to invade the province of this committee, and merely throws this out as a suggestion.

A resolution offered by Judge Bradwell, instructing this committee to prepare and report some plan to avoid the law's delay, and to secure a more speedy administration of justice in this State, was also adopted, and has been somewhat discussed in the report of the committee.

Those delays are now often grievous in particular cases, but, on the whole, are believed to be less generally so than in the past.

The writer feels his inability to devise any plan by which they can be wholly avoided Such amendments as have been suggested in practice and procedure are believed to be in the line of this resolution.

It will be remembered that at the last meeting of the American Bar Association, the special Committee on the "Delay and Uncertainty in Judicial Administration" reported the following recommendations:

1-Summary judgment should be allowed upon a negotiable instrument or other obligation to pay a definite sum of money at a definite time, unless an order of a judge be obtained upon positive affidavit and reasonable notice to the opposite party, allowing a defendant on terms to interpose a defense.

2-In an ordinary law suit, the methods of procedure should be simple and direct, without a single unnecessary distinction or detail; and whatever can be done out of Court, such as the statement of claim and defense, should be in writing, and delivered between the parties or their attorneys without waiting for the sitting of a judge.

3-Trials before courts, whether with or without juries, should be shortened by stricter discipline, closer adherence to the precise issue, less irrelevant and redundant testimony, fewer debates and no personal altercation.

4-Trials before referees should be limited in duration by order made at the time of appointment.

5-The record of a trial in every Court in which official stenographers are in attendance, should contain shorthand notes of all oral testimony, which notes, if the Court shall so order, shall be written out in longhand and filed with the clerk; but only such parts should be copied and sent to an Appellate Court as are relevant to the point to be discussed on the appeal, and if more be sent, the party sending it should be compelled to pay into Court a sum fixed by the Appellate Court by way of penalty.

6-A motion for or against a provisional remedy should be decided within a fixed number of days, and if not so decided, the remedy should fail. In all other cases a decision within a fixed period should be required of every judge and every court except a court of last resort.

7-The ordering of new trials should be restricted to cases where it is apparent that injustice has been done.

8-Whenever a court of first instance adjourns for a term leaving unfinished business, the executive should be not only authorized, but required, to commission one or more persons, or as many as may be necessary, to act as judges for the time being and finish the business. Such temporary judges should be commissioned in all courts except the court of last resort.

9-The time allowed for appealing should be much shortened, one month, or at most, two, should seem to be enough in all cases.

10-Greater attention should be paid to the selection of judges, without which no other reform, however good in itself, can succeed.

11-The statistics of litigation in the courts of the United States and of each state, should be collected and published yearly, that the people may know what business has been done and what is waiting to be done.

It will be noted that much in these recommendations has no application to the condition of matters in this State. Trials before referees are happily rare; provisional remedies by that name are unknown, and so far as they exist are generally obtained and relieved from with reasonable despatch, and time for appeal seems to be short enough.

It is thought. however, that the third and tenth recommendations which refer to the conduct of litigation and to the selection of judges call for the most serious consideration. It is undoubtedly true that in the administration of our laws is to be found much that occasions the evils under consideration, and that a higher standard of professional duty in those who minister in the temples of justice would tend

greatly to diminish them. But let us of the bar not confine ourselves to exhortation to the bench. A lawyer in his zeal for his client is temped to exert himself to the utmost for his success, and to lose sight of his high duties as an officer of the court. As such it is indeed his duty to use every legitimate means to make his client's cause appear the better, and thus a court or jury hearing both sides of a case fully appreciates and understands it better in all its bearings, and more surely reaches a right result. But a very important responsibility is cast upon the lawyer before a case comes to a hearing. Many cases are commenced which ought never to have been brought; more are defended to which there is no just defense.

Let the lawyer thoroughly investigate a case, lay aside his client's prejudices, his own disposition to share in them, and diligently strive to reach a fair judgment before trial, and if possible before suit. Having reached deliberate conviction, let him state it to his client and enforce it vigorously. In this way many cases would be adjusted out of Court that now consume much time and involve the community and all concerned in great and useless expense. Let the bench meet the bar in the same spirit. Let us not have endless discussion of "nice questions of law"- so nice as to be beyond the comprehension of the average practitioner, and substantially wholly aside from the merits of a case. Let us not have long opinions about nothing in the courts of first instance. Let us all remember that we are not like the philosophers of ancieat Greece discussing the abstract in the groves and temples, but that we are administering a practical science to the everyday affairs of life.

Let judges and lawyers strive to reach and to decide real questions in real casesgo right at the merits and consider them. There is enough in this way to engage the attention of both bench and bar without recondite investigation as to whether a placita is necessary where a record is offered, or whether a declaration on a judgment of a justice of the peace has adequately averred his jurisdiction of the person of the defendant, or whether a judgment in debt is erroneous because the debt is not duly found and the damages not properly assessed, or whether a plea concludes properly with a verification, or to the contrary. These are some of the great questions with which in times past we have struggled desperately, as a reference to our reports will show.

And the language of a distinguished judge of the highest capacity and attainments, in overruling a long line of decisions made by our Supreme Court upon one of these points, has application to all such judicial and professional triflings:

"Justice between the parties is the great desideratum, and it is for this Courts are organized. In reflecting upon prior adjudications of this Court on this subject, we are compelled to believe justice has never more than once been sacrificed to mere form, etc."

Breeze, J., in Bowden v. Bowden, 75 Ill. 111.

It is thought that we are progressing in the right direction in this State, and that in the cultivation of a high standard of professional duty and intelligence among our bar will be found the most effectual remedy for these imperfections in the administration of the law to which Judge Bradwell's timely resolution refers.

The condition of the docket of the Supreme Court of the United States is unfortunate. Some adequate measure of relief should be promptly adopted, and an intermediate Appellate Court which has done so auch for our judicial system would seem to be the most suitable agency for accomplishing the desired reform. What has here been written has been by way of suggestion and to invite discussion, rather than with the expectation or desire of committing the Association to any views or directly attempting to induce legislation.

S. S. GREGORY,

Of the Committee on Law Reform.

Mr. Swett offered the following resolution:

Resolved, that it is the sense of this Association, that the jury system as applied to civil cases, should be abolished.