On a recent vacation I met a man of affairs who hailed from Detroit. To my inquiry whether he knew our friends, Referee Paul King or George Marston, he replied, "Ya! I know them well and they are able men! There are no better Referees anywhere but they make mistakes just like the rest of us." From this qualified compliment, I concluded he had failed to get all he wanted at their experienced, highly capable hands and I concluded, too, that perhaps his testimony may have been given with his hat off. (In London last summer, I learned from a Court Clerk that oaths are administered to certain witnesses only with their hats on otherwise, the oath was found meaningless to that class, he explained.) This incident is typical, I think, and a mild expression of the laymen's mental attitude to all Referees in Bankruptcy who are quite willing to agree that perfection is an irridescent dream anywhere on earth.

But with a better understanding brought about through the activities of our National Association of Referees in Bankruptcy has come a more tolerant intelligent view of the Referees' work and an appreciably lessened spirit of criticism. I get this reflex more accurately, I am sure, since my resignation as Referee in Bankruptcy here because of the laymen's speaking outright just what is in his mind in my presence now.

I am glad to renew contacts with you good friends in these general observations The Journal has kindly invited. Academic some of them may appear in this hurriedly prepared article and you may not agree with me altogether in some of my conclusions, I know.

The Bankruptcy Act was framed in mercy and has been administered in a spirit of universal benevolence. The public begins to recognize it as a Christianized method of "foregoing one's debtors" by congressional enactment. The barbarism that sanctioned the liberal parcelling out of the debtor's quivering flesh among his exacting creditors is neither myth nor tradition. The XII. tables fastened against the walls of the Forum verified the cruel fact and not until the fourth century of the Christian era was the shameful thing expunged. In the time of Henry VIII. we note the first crude idea under our system of jurisprudence of granting the debtor some relief; here the Lord Chancellor as keeper of the King's conscience took the debtor's goods and administered them in the debtor's behalf and relieved the debtor from the further burden.

"Equity is Equality" and deals with things; not with liberty or lives in the apportionment of the debtor's goods to the creditor's demands. Thus far and no farther shall the creditor go; the debtor himself belongs to the state and the family and that he may hereafter be free to serve them in the appropriate walks of civilized life, he is given future freedom from the results of his former misfortune and improvidence. From this equitable germ have grown the various acts of Parliament and Congress and the special

courts charged with the administration of this humane and just principle. To this extent, the commonwealth intervenes to preserve the further usefulness of the citizen and maintain his beneficial status. To a degree, it is like the duty of the state to the marriage relation; it cannot be utterly destroyed without cause and when assailed wantonly, the protecting and assisting arm is extended to conserve the best condition of citizenship. For the rapid rate of increase in our divorce rate today threatens to end in an inquest upon majorities of marriage itself, it is believed.

The press and popular oratory vie with each other in ringing the charges upon the beneficence of the Act of 1898 and the amendments thereto.

-

The wrecks of panic may soon be full rigged crafts upon the commercial seas, riding upon the tides of traffic to golden shores if one reads only the newspapers and congressional records or heeds the lamenting wail of the disappointed unmeritous litigant or the exceptional lawyer with grossly exaggerated value of service rendered "not adequately compensated". And this is far from all of it, we have seen.

The State laws in respect to all matters of the collection of debts hitherto invoked and still unrepealed may be condemned to stand mute at the request of some "son of New York" or elsewhere who failing to get in on the ground floor, proceeds to dynamite the whole establishment.

None for a moment can question the power of congress to enact remedial legislation, nor fairly doubt the duty, ability or integrity of our Federal Courts in administering and enforcing its mandates.

But the cry is heard that here we have a yoking of the living and dead together. That debtors of the country are given an opportunity to rid themselves of state debt and to re-embark in the vast concerns of commercial life; that through the Federal Courts a means of collecting debts. from "going concerns" is made possible.

The philosophy of our state legislation through the Union is almost entirely founded on the maxim: "First in time; strongest in right." For a half of a century our state and people have been going forward, building up a vast trade. Our laws were framed to protect them in their diligence, and under these laws and their own diligence they have prospered; our people have prospered and our country has prospered by the energy and diligence of its citizens. But this diligence may defeat the vigilant creditor, bankrupt the debtor and destroy a "trading concern" in our own state and neighborhood, it is seen.

It has been recognized that a failing debtor's preference among his creditors is a "technical fraud" and is a "conclusive act of bankruptcy." Rather it is a species of special legislation, conclude some, whereby the "sleeping creditor,” by Act of Congress, shall have the benefits accruing to the "vigilant" one. Known integrity serves a man as a bank

credit among those who know him and makes him solvent among his people; whereas the stranger, who has no knowledge of this reserved capital of every honest man, rushes in, avers insolvency, or some act of bankruptcy, charged the critic, and the result is ruin, whether the averment is false or true. And in this connection it may well be believed by many that while the Act may be all velvet to the voluntary bankrupt it is a veritable tiger's claw to the involuntary one. "These are the things which demand a pause in this millenial acclaim in favor of this Act" said my friend, the critic; it cannot be said this Act, like Byron's Corsair, "has one virtue linked with a thousand crimes," There do remain certain faults connected with it so that it may not wholly overturn our accepted and established rules of procedure and proof and may not, for the time being, impart a new method of collecting trading papers and accounts.

These are amongst the laymen's fast fading criticisms and many, of course, don't know what they are talking about because they would not take the pains to properly inform themselves.

But laymen and lawyer alike are all in accord with Mr. Babson's observations that there should be no material changes attempted in our bankruptcy law, rules or procedure excepting "such as are needed by the economic changes in the commercial world as, e.g., when business. conditions are not static" and the difficulty of making rules adaptable in a practical way without conflict and without impinging upon certain laws or rules already existing, remains a difficult problem.

But, as I said in substance in a recent law lecture before the Kansas City School of Law, there will always exist some imperfections in bankruptcy procedure as in all other systems; these weaknesses can never be eradicated entirely and that naturally, no little criticism, much of it unjustified, will continue to be lodged against proceedings in bankruptcy, notwithstanding every strenuous honest endeavor of its administrative officials; but since it is realized that no system can be perfect, public officials everywhere must be prepared to accept criticism, philosophically, ofttimes unjust and wholly undeserved. The enactment of the Acts of Bankruptcy, I am convinced, has been shown to be well justified when all the beneficent results alike to creditors and insolvents (in the past) are considered. But, I submit the general belief, that it can function properly and successfully as a system so long and only so long as the reasons for the Bankruptcy Act continue; that the reasons and justifications for its continuance will and should also depend upon an honest, impartial, intelligent and economic administration of the Bankruptcy Law. The finest safeguard is seen in the enlightenment received from the splendid educational program carried out by our National Association of Referees in Bankruptcy.

ON C. L. L. A. COMMITTEES Referee John H. Lewis, of Minot, N. D., is chairman for North Dakota of the Committee on Legislation and Uniform State Laws of the Commercial Law League of America. Referee Herbert M. Bierce, of Winona, Minn., is re-appointed a member of the League's Committee on Bank ruptcy.

ABOUT GEORGE A. MARSTON

A sketch of his associate by REFEREE PAUL K. HING, Detroit, appearing in the Credit Digest, Detroit.

Editorial Forenote

Few Referees in the United States are better liked than Mr. Marston. It is due to the efforts of men of his type that the operation of the Bankruptcy Court has attained the degree of efficiency now to be found in this section of our county. The tasks of Referees generally are of such a nature as to put at a premium the need for a thorough knowledge of law and the most careful observance of the rights of both the Bankrupt and the Creditors. George A. Marston has earned a place of distinction among the Referees of this

country.

HON. GEO. A. MARSTON Detroit

Not only a good lawyer by virtue of his own ability, training and experience, Referee George A. Marston, the subject of this sketch, is the son of one of Michigan's most distinguished jurists, Honorable Isaac Marston, who was Attorney General of Michigan in 1874 and Justice of the Supreme Court from 1876 to 1881.

Justice Marston was appointed by Governor Bagley to fill the vacancy occasioned by the appointment to the United States Senate of Justice Isaac P. Christiancy, one of that distinguished group of Michigan jurists familiarly known to our attorneys as the "Big Four." Justice Marston was the youngest man ever chosen to the Supreme Bench either by appointment or election.

At that time the Court consisted of a Chief Justice and but three Associates, and the work of the Court not being heavy it sat but four or five days a week. Neither was there any requirement that the Justices live in Lansing, a provision subsequently enacted, so that Justice Marston maintained his residence in Bay City and was usually able to be at his office and home over week-ends. Quite frequently he took young George to Lansing with him. One of the earliest recollections of the subject of this sketch was playing marbles on the floor back of the judges while Court was in session. It is no wonder that with this background and atmosphere Referee Marston was inclined to the study and practice of the law.

The work of the Court did not appeal to Justice Marston and in 1882 he removed to Detroit, where he engaged in the general practice of law, alone at first, then as a member of the firm of Marston, Cowles & Jerome, the last named being the son of ex-Governor David H. Jerome, of Saginaw. The family resided on Pitcher Street and George attended the Irving School on Willis Avenue and later Central High School, which was then located on Capital Square. In school he was inclined toward athletics, played football in the position of left half-back and was captain of the high