The Thirty-third Annual Meeting of the New York State Bar Association HE thirty-third annual meeting of the New York State Bar Association, held in Rochester, N. Y., Jan. 20-21, brought together distinguished attorneys from all parts of the state. The annual president's address was delivered by Adelbert Moot, Esq.,
REFORM IN CRIMINAL APPEALS
Mr. Moot's address was given in the after noon. The morning session was devoted chiefly to routine business, and to the presen tation of the paper of John D. Lindsey of New York, on "The Necessity for a Court of
of the law firm of Moot, Sprague, Brownell & Marcy, of Buffalo, who spoke at length on
"Bar Association Ideals." He told of the organization of the state association in 1876. The men who modeled the organization were high minded lawyers, deeply in earnest-men whose strength, character and earnestness had left a lasting impression on his mind. "The object of this association, as then stated," he said, “and since by many other associations in nearly the same words, was ideal. They state that object to be — To cultivate the science of jurisprudence, to pro mote reform in the law, to facilitate the admin istration of justice, to elevate the standard of integrity, honor and courtesy in the legal profession. and to cherish a spirit of brotherhood among the members thereof.
“Of course, that object has not yet been attained. In fact, as we approach our ideals, we always find that, like the stars, they are still far above us to guide our feet in the way they should go." Reference was made to an examination for the bar conducted more than thirteen years ago by such able lawyers as Rufus W. Peck ham and David B. Hill, when about eighty per cent of the class was admitted,and it was thought the percentage rejected was ex traordinarily high. Today, said President Moot, not more than ten per cent of that class would be admitted on a similar oral examina tion. To the bench, he said, the lawyers and the people must look for much in the uplift of the profession, and he deplored the exception to what he declared was the rule of honest, intelligent, conscientious judges, which is to be found in New York City. However, New York is not to be taken as typical of the state
in this respect, he said. The last task President Moot, from the earth. Root] is an ideal such ideals."
of all for the lawyers, said would be to eliminate war "Your President-elect [Mn jurist to lead in the fight for
Criminal Appeal," which elicited a spirited discussion. An extract follows: Think of the irony of a statutory enactment which confers a right of which only the man of substantial means may avail himself. The mur derer, however brutal his crime, may stay the execution of the just sentence of the law by serving a notice of appeal, and counsel are assigned to argue his case. to whom substantial compensation is awarded. But the man adjudged guilty of any lesser degree of crime, whatever its circumstances or character, and even though a higher court might deem his acts wholly innocent, can have no review for lack of the necessary funds to prepare and pre sent his case. . . . The people at large know that the man who is able to command the resources necessary to a proper presentation of his case to a court of re view has at least a chance to obtain a reversal. The pauper has none. . . . The remedy. it seems to me, is a simple one. If the state ought to pay the expense of the mur derer's appeal, including the compensation of his counsel, it should do as much for the impecunious defendant convicted of a lesser crime. provided that his case presents legal questions deserving of considerating in a court of review. The condition existing, and being shown by the certificate. either of the presiding judge. or of a respectable member of the bar, counsel should be assigned to take and prosecute an appeal, which should be heard upon the original, or copies of the record and stenographic minutes in the court be low, unless the appellate court directs otherwise, in which case the record should be printed at the public expense. Counsel should be reimbursed for any necessary money outlay and also awarded rea sonable compensation for his services, except when the appellate court deems the appeal to have been frivolous. Provision should be made for the disci pline of counsel guilty of any abuse of this character. If legislation on the lines suggested would unduly increase the business of the existing appellant tribunals, a Court of Criminal Appeal should be created with exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine all criminal appeals. . . .
Most of the speakers who took part in the discussion took issue with Mr. Lindsey. Presi dent Moot expressed the opinion that the idea that the rich are able to escape justice was greatly exaggerated. Judge A. T. Clear water of Kingston thought the rich criminal was a rare bird; his rarity excites attention
