his business; (b) such private or personal property has become part of, or used for, or in connection with, or been made contractually a basis of 'credit granted to the business; (c) such property has been withdrawn from the business in fraud of creditors.

14. Such private and immune property consist only of (a) property, real and personal, which never was part of the business; (b) or which was acquired from capital or earnings legitimately withdrawn from the business without injury to the rights of existing creditors and without intention to defraud prospective creditors; (c) profits or re-investments of such private property.

15. In case of withdrawal of a partner he would continue liable for debts of the partnership to the extent of the capital withdrawn by him.

16. In effect such change in the laws of partnership, and, generally, of the liability of private property for business debts, will constitiute every business, individual or partnership, a quasi corporation and as such should be subject to all taxes imposed upon corporations.

17. The principle herein advocated is, in part, now recognized in the case of death or insolvency of a partnership. Partnership creditors have to look primarily to partnership assets; individual cerditors to individual assets; only a surplus of either can go to the creditors of the other assets. The change advocated herein is therefore not so radical as upon first view it may appear. That which now is merely a primary right of a creditor is turned into a sole and only right.

18. The far reaching effect of such change in the law is impossible to foresee. However, the following consequences seem very probable:

First. By abolishing individual or private liability for debts there will be a compliance with a general protest in the business world against an antiquated and irksome, if not even an unjust legal principle (incomparison with modern corporations) by which the honest and legitimate savings of a life time may in case of misfortune be swept away.

Second. That a stop will be put to the anomalous practice of our citizens going to another State for incorporation, in derogation of civil virtue and loyalty to the laws of the State.

Third. That credit will become, as it should be, more a matter of personal trust and honor in the debtor, than based upon property. It is not the property, but its prudent and honest management which is the best security of the creditor.

Fourth. Under such change the business man's family will, in case of his death, or misfortune, have some protection against want. A business, though solvent, suddenly deprived of its manager and guiding spirit seldom realizes sufficient to pay more than its debts, and legitimate savings are withdrawn from the support of the family.

Fifth. Such legal provision for the benefit of the family may lessen the ever increasing nervous strain upon business men.

Sixth. That with such change all business, not only corporations, will be taxed as corporations. For it is wrong that a business incorporated, say, with $50,000 should pay State taxes, and a neighboring business not incorporated, with perhaps ten times that capital, should pay merely the small amount imposed by the Mercantile License Tax. This License Tax is cumbersome, costly to collect, and unpopular, and should be repealed.

19. Summarized, the purpose of this paper is to call attention to the practice by which in an indirect way, and often in derogation of the laws of this State, individual liability for debts may be avoided; the easy and only method to legalize what the business world obtains surreptitiously; and incidentally to point out the increased State revenue to be obtained thereby.

March 18th, 1910.

STATISTICS ON LITIGATION.

The Legislative Committee of the Allegheny County Bar Association at the regular meeting of the association on Friday, April 1, 1910, presented a report upon the statistics of the Common Pleas Court business for 1909 at the same time making a comparison with 1908. The report is as follows:

Mr. F. C. Osburn,

President of Allegheny Bar Association.

From examination of the Court docket made by Mr. John Voght of the prothonotary's office of the business of the four Courts during the year 1909 we are able to present the following report:

Number of suits entered in Years 1908 and 1909.

Joseph M. Swearingen, President Judge of Common Pleas Court No. 4, Fifth Judicial District (Allegheny County), of the State of Pennsylvania, is the son of William V. and Nancy I. (Shannon) Swearingen, having been born September 5, 1854, in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, where he spent the early years of his life. After completing the usual public school course and being graduated from the Academy at Frankford Springs, Pa., he matriculated at the Washington and Jefferson College and there graduated with the class of 1879. He registered in Washington County as a student at law with Boyd Crumrine, Esq., and was admitted to the bar there June 13, 1881. On July 2, 1881, on motion of Judge Josiah Cohen, now his associate upon the bench, he was admitted to the practice of law in Allegheny County.

As a lawyer Judge Swearingen proved to be painstaking and early acquired a reputation for thoroughness. He attracted the attention of the courts for his ability to master intricate legal questions and for this reason was often appointed master in equity cases and other suits under the rules then in force. He built up a large practice and in 1907, when Common Pleas Court No. 4 was created for Allegheny County, at an election held by the Allegheny County Bar Association to suggest candidates for the bench of the new court, the name of Judge Swearingen headed the list when the ballots were counted. He was appointed President Judge of the Court by Gov. Edwin S. Stuart and was commissioned on the 9th day of April, 1907. The same year he was nominated by the Republican party and elected in November for a full term of ten years, beginning the first Monday of January, 1908.

Judge Swearingen resides at Ingram and was married the 30th day of March, 1886, to Miss Sarah Wherry. He has two children living, a son, William V. Swearingen, and a daughter, Nancy I. Swearingen.

PITTSBURGH FROM DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW.

BY CHARLES W. DAHLINGER OF THE ALLEGHENY COUNTY BAR.

Being an address delivered before the Allegheny County Bar Association at Pittsburgh on Friday, April 1, 1910.

ANTHONY TROLLOPE visited Pittsburgh in 1862. “It is without exception, the blackest place which I ever saw," he wrote. But he was pleased with the city nevertheless. "Nothing can be more picturesque than the site," he declared, "for the spurs of the mountains come down close around the town and the rivers are broad and swift, and can be seen for miles from heights which may be reached in a short walk. Even the filth and wondrous blackness of the place are picturesque when looked down upon from above. The tops of the churches are visible, and some of the larger buildings may be partially traced through the thick brown settled smoke. But the city itself is buried in a dense cloud. I was never more in love with smoke and dirt than when I stood here and watched the darkness of night close in upon the floating soot which hovered over the house-tops of the city."

In its infancy Pittsburgh was known because of the fame it had acquired in the French and Indian war. The value and the beauty of the region had been early exploited in Pennsylvania and Virginia by English speaking Indian traders who had trafficked within its confines. The same class of men of French nationality, had related the same marvelous tales in distant Canada. It was these adventurous speculators also who first told of the two large and navigable rivers which here joined and formed a third, larger and more important than the others, all of which could be made to play important parts in the settlement of the country which they traversed. The richness of the land shut in by hills covered with for ests of oak, and walnut, and hickory, and maple and pine, was descanted upon. The result was that world famous history was made at this point of land. The deeds done about the gates of what has since become the city of Pittsburgh form a fascinating page in the history of the United States. Here in 1754, the wily Gaul outwitted the slower-moving Briton, tearing the land out of his very grasp, by a movement from Canada, through impenetrable woods