which are utterly useless at the present time. Many of these laws should be repealed; many more should be amended so as to conform to present conditions, but such amendments should be made under the advice and supervision of trained legal minds, These amendments and repeals can in part easily be made by the aid of a recodifying commission, but all new legislation, whether original or amendatory, which affect personal or property interests as well as remedial legislation, should have, before final enactment, the approval of this Association, through its proper committee. A plan similar to this is existent in New York, and all proposed laws which affect New York City are submitted, before final enactment, to the New York City Bar for its approval or disapproval. In the opinion of your President, some plan as is here merely hastily outlined, might well be considered by the Association. If this suggestion is carried out to a successful fruition, there can be no question but that the State Bar Association will at once become a mighty and forceful power in the State, more effective than any other organization in promoting and advancing the cause of good government, good citizenship and the welfare and happiness of our people.

But our Association should not confine itself to the improving of our Statutory Law, it should go farther and endeavor, by every means in its power, to bring about an amendment of the Constitution of the State in several respects. Article four of the Constitution, as amended in 1912, has, it is generally conceded, proven entirely unsatisfactory to everyone, Courts, lawyers and laity, and should at the earliest opportunity be changed.

The Association, at its meeting in this place in 1912, after listening to two long and able addresses by the distinguished authors of the amendatory sections, and with very little consideration or discussion, approved by a small vote the proposed amendments, but it is easily safe to say that a majority of the members there present who voted in favor of the approval had never had any business in the Supreme Court since their admission to the bar. It is also equally safe to say that those of us who have had business there, including the authors, have long since discovered that the amendment was not a success and did not work as they

honestly anticipated that it would. There was then a widespread complaint, not only in our own State, but all over the country, about "The Laws Delays," and this proposed amendment was, as it then seemed and still seems to your President, approved by this Association for the reason that it appeared to point out a way by which the final determination of a litigation might be quickly arrived at. The speedy determination of litigation is greatly to be desired, but, it seems to me, it is far more important and necessary to the whole people, that justice should be exact than that it should be speedy. There is a tendency in the human mind, inherent perhaps, in its nature, and unexplainable sometimes, to desire a change, and changes do occur, have constantly, since the creation of the world, occurred, and will continue to occur until the end of time, but when a change in the fundamental law of a State or Nation is made, it should be only when the necessity of such change is imperative and then only after careful, studious and mature deliberation and not to appease popular clamor, to follow any fad or fancy or to conform to either manufactured or natural sentiment. I cannot refrain from quoting in this connection the wise words of Lord Bacon, so aptly chosen as the text of the remarkable address delivered in 1913, before our Association by Chief Justice Parker:

"It is good also not to try experiments in States, except the necessity be urgent, or the utility evident; and well to beware that it be the reformation that draweth on the change, and not the desire of change that pretendeth the reformation."

Would to God that these words had been in the minds of our members in 1912, before we made that unhappy endorsement of the judicial amendment for, I firmly believe, that such endorsement by the State Bar Association, published as it was broadcast over the State, as the deliberate judgment of the lawyers of the State, was the cause of its ratification by the people.

Your Executive Committee has placed this question upon the program as one of the subjects of discussion at this meeting and I sincerely trust that it may receive a more careful consideration than it did seven years ago.

Another change in the Constitution which, in the opinion of your President, should be made, the necessity for which has been so thoroughly and completely demonstrated as to be self-evident, is that of Section 7 of Article Five, the so-called Primary Election Law.

It is extremely difficult for me, in speaking of this law, to use parliamentary or even decent language. This law is a delusion and a snare, a farce, a humbug and a fraud; its operation has resulted in more bribery and corruption than was ever dreamed of under the convention system and, taken in connection with the corrupt practice act, which last named act is a wise and good law, alas, more honored in its breach than in its observance, has brought about perjury to an extent that is simply appalling. Under its operation, fitness for, and ability to properly fill, an office are lost sight of; integrity, character and standing in the community are not considered, but the candidate considered best qualified is the one who can cover the most ground, can spend the most money, shake hands with the most people and kiss the most babies. I, myself, have seen a retired puddler, who by way of being, conducted a bowling alley, a man of excellent personal character, but who did not know the difference between a volume and the Statutes and the Koran, nominated under this system and, by aid of its twin sister in iniquity, the non-partisan judicial ballot law, elected to the bench of a Court of Record. His qualifications and reasons for his nomination and election, as set forth by himself on his campaign cards, were set forth in this manner, "Sixteen reasons why I should be nominated and elected,' and the sixteen reasons consisted of a half-tone picture of himself and wife and fourteen children. Does anyone, can anyone, think that under the old system such a nomination could be made? I could, if time permitted, recount many other instances of like occurrences, possibly not so flagrant, but equally illustrative of the farcical results of this law, but it would be unnecessary, as you all know them. Yet a learned lawyer, aspiring to a judicial position, perhaps to close his career, and it is an honorable aspiration, has, if he can possibly hope for success, to humiliate himself and degrade his office, by traveling over the State, District or

County, and personally soliciting support, like a street beggar craving alms. The continuation of this system is unthinkable, it is inherently wrong and the Convention plan, where nominations are made in the true American manner, by delegates chosen for the purpose in ward, township or precinct, by the electors of their immediate environment, who personally know them and have confidence in them, must and will be restored. The direct primary has proven itself a failure in every State in which it has been established. In some of the States it has been abandoned; in others movements are under way to abolish it and Ohio should not lag behind in this movement.

Permit me to once more read an editorial from what is probably the leading newspaper of the United States, The New York Sun:

"The restoration of state nominating conventions has been delayed for a year at least by the potent influence of political cowardice and inertia within the walls of the State Capitol. Direct nominations remain with us because the lawmakers are too lazy or too timid to sweep the costly, unrepresentative system away, and re-establish the method that developed naturally and logically from the free play of our institutions.

"An overwhelming majority of informed and intelligent citizens desire the abolition of a cumbersome, unsatisfactory practice, which has brought us none of the benefits its advocates promised and has encouraged evils that should be eradicated.

"At a moment in which the best minds in public life should counsel together, and the declarations and candidates of parties should enlist the most earnest study of their most trusted leaders, the Republicans and Democrats alike are left in the Empire State at the mercy of temporary ebullitions of emotion and the corrective influence of an unofficial convention without authority, power or prestige.

"The adoption of the direct primary was a collossal blunder; its retention is a national menance.

This has been widely copied in this State and, almost universally approved as expressing the sentiment of Ohio, and we, as leaders and moulders of public sentiment and opinion should be in the front rank in the endeavor to change this inexcusable and abominable system.

The grim reaper, before whose sickle we all must fall, has been particularly busy among the members of our Association during the past year. Since we last met his icy finger has touched no less than four gentlemen whom this Association has honored in past years by electing them to the presidency and who in turn have honored it by their ability in such office. It is not my purpose to pronounce any eulogy at this time upon them, as that will be far better done by others during the meeting, but I cannot refrain at this time from paying a personal tribute to the memory of one who for fifteen years has served the Association so ably and courteously in the office of Treasurer. We shall miss Clement R. Gilmore, miss his genial smile, his uniform courtesy, but we will remember him, not only for his personal characteristics but for his sterling character and we will all be better men for having known him. My personal relations with Mr. Gilmore, at least during the past ten years, have been exceedingly close and during that time I cannot recall having a serious disagreement with him or having heard an unkind or unfriendly word from his lips. In his death I feel that I have lost a close personal friend, and I am glad of the opportunity to express my sentiments and feelings in this slight tribute.

A year ago, my friends, we met in annual meeting under extraordinary conditions. The dark cloud of the greatest and wickedest war that the entire world has ever known overshadowed, not only this, but every other Association in this country. Our sons, our brothers and our immediate associates had, at the call of our country, laid down their duties as judges and lawyers, closed their books and offices, bade farewell to their wives, their children and friends, abandoned their peaceful occupations and habiliments, donned khaki, braved the hitherto unheard of perils of three thousand miles of ocean and, in a foreign land, surrounded by people speaking a strange language, actuated only by a high spirit of patriotic duty, plunged into the hell of armed conflict. How well they succeeded history will record. The names of Cantigny, Chateau Thierry, St. Mihiel and the Argonne will never again be mentioned without recalling the unexampled, but perfect natural heroism of the American army. When the zero hour