that are apt to come before him judicially, or to be involved in questions of law to be determined by him.

28. Partisan Politics. While entitled to entertain his personal views of political questions, and while not required to surrender his rights or opinions as a citizen, it is inevitable that suspicion of being warped by political bias will attach to a judge who becomes the active promoter of the interests of one political party as against another. He should avoid making political speeches, making or soliciting payment of assessments or contributions to party funds, the public endorsement of candidates for political office and participation in party conventions.

29. Self-Interest. He should abstain from performing or taking part in any judicial act in which his personal interests are involved. If he has personal litigation in the court of which he is a judge, he need not resign his judgeship on that account, but he should, of course, refrain from any judicial act in such a controversy.

30. Candidacy for Office.-A candidate for judicial position should not make or suffer others to make for him, promises of conduct in office which appeal to the cupidity or prejudices of the appointing or electing power; he should not announce in advance his conclusions of law on disputed issues to secure class support and he should do nothing while a candidate to create the impression, that if chosen, he will administer his office with bias, partiality, or improper discrimination.

While holding judicial office he should decline nomination to any other place which might reasonably tend to create a suspicion or criticism that the proper performance of his judicial duties is prejudiced or prevented thereby.

If a judge becomes a candidate for any office, he should refrain from all conduct which might tend to arouse reasonable suspicion that he is using the power or prestige of his judicial position to promote his candidacy or the success of his party.

He should not permit others to do anything in behalf of his candidacy which would reasonably lead to such suspicion.

31.

Private Law Practice.-In many states the practice of law by one holding judicial position is forbidden. In superior courts of general jurisdiction, it should never be permitted. In inferior courts in some states, it is permitted because the county or municipality is not able to pay adequate living compensation for a competent judge. In such cases one who practices law is in a position of great delicacy and must be scrupulously careful to avoid conduct in his practice whereby he utilizes or seems to utilize his judicial position to further his professional success.

He should not practice in the court in which he is a judge, even when presided over by another judge, or appear therein for himself in any controversy.

If forbidden to practice law, he should refrain from accepting any professional employment while in office.

He may properly act as arbitrator or lecture upon or instruct in law, or write upon the subject, and accept compensation therefor, if such course does not interfere with the due performance of his judicial duties, and is not forbidden by some positive provision of the law.

32. Gifts and Favors. He should not accept any presents or favors from litigants, or from lawyers practicing before him or from others whose interests are likely to be submitted to him for judgment.

33. Social Relations. It is not necessary to the proper performance of judicial duty that a judge should live in retirement or seclusion; it is desirable that, so far as reasonable attention to the completion of his work will permit, he continue to mingle in social intercourse, and that he should not discontinue his interest in or appearance at meetings of members of the bar. He should, however, in pending or prospective litigation before him be particularly careful to avoid such action as may reasonably tend to awaken the suspicion that his social or business relations or friendships, constitute an element in influencing his judicial conduct.

34. A Summary of Judicial Obligation.-In every particular his conduct should be above reproach. He should be conscientious, studious, thorough, courteous, patient, punctual, just, impartial, fearless of public clamor, regardless of public praise, and indifferent to private, political, or partisan influences; he should administer justice according to law, and deal with his appointments as a public trust; he should not allow other affairs or his private interests to interfere with the prompt and proper performance of his judicial duties, nor should he administer the office for the purpose of advancing his personal ambitions or increasing his popularity.

This committee desires to submit these Canons of Judicial Ethics as their report and tomorrow we will bring them before the association for their adoption. You will notice on the program that your consideration of this report is already made a special order for 10:45 tomorrow morning.

PRESIDENT YOUNG: We will now have the report of the committee on legal education and admission to the bar. Is Mr. Manley in the room? We are behind with our reports. We will

hear the committee on the revision of the probate code, Judge Bagley.

REVISION OF THE PROBATE CODE

JUDGE BAGLEY: Your committee on revision of the probate code begs leave to report as follows:

This committee was continued at the last annual meeting for the purpose of considering the advisability of submitting to the association a set of simplified probate forms.

After considerable correspondence between the members of the committee and with other lawyers interested in the matter, it has not been found possible for the committee to decide either upon the necessity of a new set of forms or the proper method of submitting the same to the lawyers of the state if agreed upon.

Many lawyers seem to feel that the forms now in use are fairly adequate and that any change at this time would lead to unnecessary expense and confusion. Several members of the committee also feel that the interests of the publishing houses should be considered. The publishing houses all express a readiness to make any changes in the forms determined by the committee to be essential, but point out that the 1925 amendments to the probate code made many changes necessary at considerable expense to them. The publishing houses have now large stocks of blanks on hand and are, naturally, very loath to have anything done which will render such stocks useless. As conservators of vested interests, most lawyers naturally sympathize more or less with the publishers.

Even if a model set of blanks should be prepared, however, the committee has been unable to agree upon any method of submitting the same to the lawyers. To attempt to submit a model set of blanks to each lawyer would be a task beyond the ability of the committee to undertake. But unless this were done, it is hard to see how such a model set would be of any real use. merely read to the lawyers present at this meeting, the reading would only be another tiresome bore to the sufferers here present.

If

A number of the committee suggest that a model set of blanks be submitted in the form of a bill to the next legislature. It is possible that this might be advisable. But the matter is not one properly for legislation. We have already too many laws regulating practice. And experience shows that the forms already made statutory, such as Letters Testamentary and Warranty Deeds, are never used.

On the whole, it is the sense of a majority of the committee

that no set of new probate forms be submitted at this time. It is further suggested by several members of the committee that lawyers meet the situation by dictating their own forms as far as possible, omitting the names of petitioners and respondents from the title, except in the case of citations, and further simplifying by omitting all unnecessary verbiage and by stating jurisdictional facts as briefly as possible.

In cases where forms are dictated, an experienced county judge suggests that copies be made for the use of the court as a record by pasting them directly in the proper recordbook. County judges as a rule are, as we know, adverse to the use of any but the printed forms because of the time required to copy dictated forms.

If lawyers, as a rule, adopt the practice of preparing their own simplified forms, the resultant loss of business to the blank publishing concerns will perhaps overcome their reluctance to change and they themselves will meet the situation by supplying us with new blank forms, so simple and so easily understood that it will be easier in the future than it has been in the past for our stenographers to do our probate work for us.

Respectfully,

HORACE BAGLEY,

Chairman.

PRESIDENT YOUNG: What will you do with the report?

MR. BURNETT: I move its adoption.

MR. ELLSWORTH: I was thinking that if you are going to consider the report presented by Mr. Lovell, it will be necessary to have some of them printed. There are only one-half dozen copies here. It will be impossible to remember from the reading

of them.

PRESIDENT YOUNG: No copies available. Copies of the proceedings are exhausted. It would be necessary to have them reprinted, if you insist. As there is no motion on the matter, we will pass on.

I might say that the committee on codes and laws, of which Judge Johnson was chairman, states that there was nothing for the committee to report formally because the work was completed. The revised laws have been printed and distributed.

JUDGE ELLSWORTH: I move that the committee be discharged. The motion was seconded.

MR. CUPLER: I think it would be inadvisable to dismiss that committee without this association giving a vote of thanks to Judge Johnson and the committee. I know the amount of labor

that was required to get it out. I would amend the motion by adding a vote of thanks.

PRESIDENT: Would you accept that amendment?

JUDGE ELLSWORTH: I cannot, as I am a member of the committee.

MR. ADAMS: I object to that motion. I think we should have a committee working to that end.

PRESIDENT YOUNG: The question is on the adoption of the motion made by Judge Ellsworth that the committee be discharged.

MR. CUPLER: Was my amendment accepted by Mr. Ellsworth?

PRESIDENT YOUNG: No.

MR. CUPLER: Then as a substitute motion, I move that the report of the committee be adopted.

Seconded by MR. NOSTDAL: Carried.

PRESIDENT YOUNG: The motion is carried and the committee is discharged. We will now have the report of the committee on the revision of federal practice.

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF

FEDERAL PRACTICE

In the months of January and February, 1926, your committee, through the kind assistance and co-operation of Representative Burtness, securied copies of legislation pending in congress affecting federal practice and procedure. At that time, your committee examined the bills pending and made a report, copy of which report is hereto attached.

The declaratory judgment bill, H. R. 5365, was favorably reported by the judiciary committee of the house on April 19th and passed the house on May 17th. It is now pending before the judiciary committee of the senate with good prospect of passage before the close of the present congress on March 4th, next.

The bill H. R. 564, commonly called the stenographer's bill, has been favorably reported by the house committee, but has not as yet been considered on the floor.

Bill H. R. 120, being a bill introduced by Mr. Burntess to change the fees of jurors and witnesses in the federal courts, has been enacted into a law. It is now under Public No. 148-69th congress and a copy is hereto attached. This legislation was much needed as jurors and witnesses in the federal courts did not get enough pay to even take care of their actual expenses.