ALEX. SIMPSON, JR., Philadelphia: Within the time prescribed for pleadings in other cases, the act says.

V. GILPIN ROBINSON, Philadelphia: That answers it, but I think it would make it clearer to put in fifteen days, as in the action of assumpsit.

ALEX. SIMPSON, JR., Philadelphia: I have accepted Mr. Woodward's suggestion; I do not think the other is necessary.

The question being upon the adoption of the act as amended, it was agreed to.

ALEX. SIMPSON, JR., Philadelphia: The only other matter which the Committee on Law Reform reports upon is the resolution offered last year and referred to them, requesting them to consider and report as to whether the Judges of the Courts of Quarter Sessions ought to be required to appoint official stenographers. There is no report made in reference thereto, and no draft of an act, because Mr. Abbott, who presented that resolution at our meeting a year ago was a member of the Legislature this year and presented an act covering the point, which was passed by the Legislature and approved by the Governor, and therefore no action was required by us. We therefore simply ask that the Committee be discharged from further consideration of that subject, and I so move.

Duly seconded, and agreed to.

V. GILPIN ROBINSON, Philadelphia: Before this order of business is withdrawn, if it meets with Mr. Simpson's approval, I would suggest that the act regarding bills and answers in equity, etc., mentioned in the report, be kept alive and presented at the next session of the Legislature.

ALEX. SIMPSON, JR., Philadelphia: It will be presented. It is always so done. Our proposed acts are presented from session to session until the Legislature approves them.

EDMUND E. KIERNAN, Somerset: I do not know whether I am a lawyer

THE PRESIDENT: Likely not.

EDMUND E. KIERNAN, Somerset: I leave that to the Chairman, of course-but I would like to make a motion with regard to a matter to be presented to the Committee on Law Reform for consideration. Am I in order?

THE PRESIDENT: I would suggest that the matter be brought up at to-morrow morning's session under the head of new business.

W. HENRY SUTTON, Philadelphia: Before passing from the report of the Committee on Law Reform I desire to call attention to the act already passed by the Legislature with reference to the appointment by the Supreme Court of Judges from one district to sit in another, but which, in my judgment, does not afford sufficient help at the juncture which exists at this time in Philadelphia. It is said that there are more than 3000 cases awaiting trial in the Courts of Common Pleas in Philadelphia. This act provides for the assignment of one Judge from some other judicial district to sit. If that Judge comes, and no doubt he will, and sits forty weeks in a year, and tries ten cases a week, he will try four hundred cases out of over three thousand; and, while that is some help, it is far from sufficient help. I would suggest that the act already passed be amended to the effect that the Chief Justice may designate one or more Judges from one or more judicial districts, so that we might have the relief that would come from the appointment of, say, three Judges. As it is now, it is almost a disgrace of justice, and it is a defeat of justice in very many cases.

THE PRESIDENT: The Chairman of the Executive Committee will take note of the suggestion.

Has the Chairman of the Committee on Legal Education a further report to make?

JAMES M. LAMBERTON, Chairman, Dauphin: The Committee on Legal Education has not reported any resolution, and there is then nothing further to bring before the Association at this time.

THE PRESIDENT: The consideration of the Report on Legal Biography is next in order.

EDWARD W. BIDDLE, Chairman, Cumberland: The Committee on Legal Biography reported a resolution yesterday with reference to the turning over to the Law Association of additions or amendments made to the Rules of Court in the various counties, which I think ought to be passed on.

tion.

THE PRESIDENT: Do you make such a motion?

EDWARD W. BIDDLE, Cumberland: I make such a mo

Resolved, That the Committee on Legal Education be requested to furnish yearly at the time of our annual meeting, to the Law Association of Philadelphia, to be placed in its library for the use and convenience of the Bar of the State, the additions and amendments made during the preceding year to the Rules of Court of those counties of the State whose rules are on file in said Library; and also, upon request, to perform a similar service for the proper library in each of the other cities where the Appellate Courts, or either of them, sit to hear arguments.

Duly seconded.

ALEX. SIMPSON, JR., Philadelphia: Twelve years ago, as you will find by turning to the fourth volume of the report of the proceedings of this Association, we adopted a resolution which provided that the Committee on Legal Biography should report each year to the Association any changes made in the Rules of Court of the respective districts which embodied more than a mere change of verbiage. That resolution is still in force, but so far as I have been

able to find out the Committee on Legal Biography has never done a single thing under it.

THE PRESIDENT: We are now having the Report of the Committee on Legal Biography. The resolution offered seems to be in line with what Mr. Simpson has just stated.

ALEX. SIMPSON, JR., Philadelphia: It is exactly what we did twelve years ago; but if the Association wants to repeat it I do not object to it.

THE PRESIDENT: We will do it again, with the hope that it may have some effect on the Committee on Legal Education.

The question being upon the resolution as offered, it was agreed to.

THE PRESIDENT: The next report for consideration is that of the Committee on Uniform State Laws, Mr. Walter George Smith, Chairman.

WALTER GEORGE SMITH, Chairman, Philadelphia: This report deals with the subject of divorce, not asking any affirmative action, except on the subject of wife desertion, on which it submits an elaborate bill, and also deals with the subject of foreign wills. I will not take the time of the Association in making any more than a mere general reference to what is stated in the report on the subject of divorce.

As has been said time and time again to the Association, it has been the custom of the Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, when the duty was imposed upon them by the result of the deliberations of the Conference on Uniform State Laws, to bring to the State of Pennsylvania various measures that have been approved by the Conference and to submit them to the Pennsylvania Bar Association so that the Association should pass judgment upon them,-not that they were under any obligation to do so, but because this

is the only Association that represents the sentiment of the profession, and it is a matter of the first importance that the community should be educated to an appreciation of the importance of these measures. This Association has set the stamp of its approval upon all of the measures that have been accepted by the Legislature, and upon two that have not been accepted-one, the Sales Act, which passed through all the stages necessary up to the final one in the last Legislature, and failed then because it was put upon the postponed calendar, not, I think, because there was any opposition to it, but because of the multitude of demands upon the time of the members of the Legislature collectively,⚫ and I think the prospects are more than good that it will pass two years hence. That act has already been accepted by a great number of the States. The Legislature did accept the Stock Transfer Act and the Bill of Lading Act, and as to those two it is in line with the State of Massachusetts and other important States, although those measures have only emanated from the Conference of Commissioners within a period of about two years.

The Divorce Act has been before the Legislature of Pennsylvania for three sessions. It was drawn in accordance with the resolutions adopted by the National Divorce Congress, which Congress was convened by a request from the Governor of Pennsylvania in response to a resolution of the Legislature of Pennsylvania, and all of the expenses of the Congress were paid by an appropriation from the treasury of the State of Pennsylvania. It might well have been assumed that this community was particularly interested in the subject of divorce reform. The act has received the approval of this Association. It passed the Senate at the last session of the Legislature, after hearing before its Judiciary General Committee of the Commissioners or their representatives. It was then referred to the Judiciary Special Committee of the House, and no hearing even was accorded to the Commissioners who had submitted