UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 SCHOOL OF LAW 
 LIBRARY
 
 THE CHICAGO SOCIETY 
 
 OF 
 
 ADVOCATES 
 
 1915
 
 CK,-t» v Q^eh, of M\>*<*fa- 
 
 BOOK OF 
 
 THE CHICAGO SOCIETY 
 
 OF 
 
 ADVOCATES 
 
 CHICAGO 
 1915
 
 6A 
 CAlZ&l 
 
 IS 15 
 
 Copyright 
 
 by 
 
 The Chicago Society 
 
 of 
 
 Advocates. 
 
 1915. 
 
 q 2. 
 t-u-tf
 
 HISTORICAL SKETCH. 
 
 There had been some discussion of the matter for several 
 years in the city of Chicago, before an invitation, dated June 
 3, 1914, was addressed to fifty-sis trial lawyers representing 
 with their firms about one hundred of the most active practi- 
 tioners in the city, and to the Chief Justices of the nisi priiis 
 courts to meet at dinner on Wednesday evening, June 10, 1914, 
 at the Chicago Club to consider the subject stated in the invi- 
 tation as follows : 
 
 ' ' A discussion at a recent meeting of the Chicago Bar Asso- 
 ciation has suggested that perhaps it would be worth while 
 to effect some form of voluntary organization among those 
 lawyers of this city who devote a large portion of their time 
 to the trial of causes, whether at nisi prius or on appeal, with 
 a view of improving themselves and their juniors, rising at 
 or coming to the bar, in the art of advocacy, to the end that 
 the trial bar may acquire an increase of savoir faire and 
 standing and the public and the bench a clearer knowledge 
 of its ability and character, the ultimate purpose being, of 
 course, the better and speedier administration of justice." 
 
 There were present at the meeting about forty members 
 of the bar and also Chief Justices Petit, Baldwin, Brentano 
 and Olson and Mr. Justice Mack. Mr. Justice Carter of the 
 Supreme Court was unable to be present as the Court was in 
 session but sent an encouraging letter. 
 
 Mr. Jacob M. Dickinson presided and after full debate the 
 following resolution was adopted. 
 
 "Resolved: That it is both timely and expedient to form 
 an organization of those members of the bar who do or desire 
 to devote a substantial portion of their time to the trial of 
 causes either in courts of the first instance or on appeal, and 
 that a committee of seven be appointed by the Chair to per- 
 fect the details of such an organization and report to the in-
 
 vited members thereof in time for the opening of the courts 
 in September next." 
 
 Pursuant to this resolution the Chairman appointed the 
 following Committee on Organization : Mr. Eugene E. Prus- 
 sing, Chairman, Mr. A. M. Kales, Hon. Harry Olson, Mr. 
 Fletcher Dobyns, Hon. C. S. Cutting, Mr. Fred D. Silber, Mr. 
 Amos C. Miller. 
 
 The Committee prepared a constitution and thereupon is- 
 sued an invitation which recited the foregoing and concluded 
 as follows: 
 
 "The Committee has formulated a Constitution for a 
 
 CHICAGO SOCIETY OF ADVOCATES 
 
 and selected a list of about 200 members of the bar to be in- 
 vited to become Charter members. 
 
 "In extending this invitation to you the Committee sub- 
 mits the proposed Constitution, and requests your attend- 
 ance at a meeting to complete the organization, to be held 
 Thursday evening, October 12, 1914, at 6 :30 P. M. at the Mid- 
 day Club, in the First National Bank Building." 
 
 The meeting of October 12, 1914, was attended by sixty 
 members of the bar and twenty more had accepted member- 
 ship but were not present. The proposed constitution was 
 subjected to a very interesting and complete discussion in 
 which nearly all present participated and in its revised form 
 was unanimously adopted. 
 
 The Committee on Organization was continued and directed 
 to submit the revised constitution to those invited to become 
 Charter members with a call for a subsequent meeting. 
 
 On Monday, November 9, 1914, at 6 :30 P. M., at the Mid-day 
 Club the next meeting was held, at which 105 were reported 
 as having accepted the invitation to membership. The revised 
 constitution was adopted and will be found on page 15. A 
 Board of Governors was duly elected and the organization 
 completed. The meeting was addressed by Mr. Justice Wil- 
 liam Renwiek Riddel], of the Supreme Court of Ontario, who
 
 spoke upon the legal profession of Ontario and particularly on 
 the relation of barrister and solicitor there. The address will 
 be found on page 35. 
 
 The Board of Governors met on November 14, 1914, and 
 organized by selecting its officers and a Committee on Pro- 
 gram. 
 
 Mr. Albert M. Kales has prepared and published in the 
 Illinois Law Review for January, 1915, an article on "The 
 Economic Basis for a Society of Advocates in the City of 
 Chicago," which will be found on page 21.
 
 BOARD OF GOVERNORS. 
 
 FOR ONE YEAR. 
 
 James G. Condon. 
 Henry R. Platt. 
 
 for two years. 
 
 Harry Olson. 
 George H. Peaks. 
 
 FOR THREE YEARS. 
 
 Fred D. Silber. 
 Albert M. Kales. 
 
 FOR FOUR YEARS. 
 
 Andrew R. Sheriff. 
 Amos C. Miller. 
 
 FOR FIVE YEARS. 
 SlGMUND ZEISLER. 
 
 Eugene E. Prussing.
 
 OFFICERS. 
 
 1914—1915. 
 
 Eugene E. Peussing, President. 
 Room 1122, Merchants Loan & Trust Bldg. 
 
 Albert M. Kales, Vice President. 
 Room 1616, Marquette Bldg. 
 
 "William R. Medakis, Treasurer. 
 Room 1812, Harris Trust Bldg. 
 
 Herbert Harley, Secretary. 
 Room 340, National Life Bldg.
 
 CHAETER MEMBERS. 
 
 Adams, Elmer H 1100 American Trust Bldg. 
 
 Ahrens, John P 822 Reaper Block 
 
 ApMadoe, W. Tudor 1542 First National Bank bldg. 
 
 Ball, Farlin H 808 Title & Trust Bldg. 
 
 Barton George P 1445 Monadnoek Bldg. 
 
 Beckwith, J. W 810 Title & Trust Bldg. 
 
 Brown, Fred A 1518 Otis Bldg. 
 
 Brown, Wm., Jr 1220 Stock Exchange Bldg. 
 
 Buckingham, George T 9th Fl., 226 S. La Salle St. 
 
 Burling, Edward B 1201-203 S. Dearborn St. 
 
 Busch, Francis X 830 National Life Bldg. 
 
 Calhoun, Wm. J 940 The Rookery 
 
 Carter, Allen J 826 Federal Bldg. 
 
 Childs, Robert W 826 Federal Bldg. 
 
 Cleveland, Chester E 1546 American Trust Bldg. 
 
 Cohen, Lawrence A 823 Chamber of Commerce Bldg. 
 
 Condon, James G 722 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Cook, Wells M 916 New York Life Bldg. 
 
 Davis, Brode B 1011 The Rookery 
 
 Dickinson, J. M 800 The Temple 
 
 Dobyns, Fletcher 1060 The Rookery 
 
 Doyle, Wm. A 1206 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Dunne, Ed. F., Jr 1905 Conway Bldg. 
 
 Finn, Richard J 1217 Ashland Block 
 
 Folsom, Richard S 1822-72 W. Adams St. 
 
 Foreman, Milton J 817 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Foster, Stephen A 1414 Monadnoek Bldg. 
 
 Godman, Elwood G 808 Marquette Bldg. 
 
 Gorham, Sydney S 1021 New York Life Bldg. 
 
 Greenacre, I. T 404-32 W. Washington St. 
 
 Gresham, Otto 1201 Title & Trust Bldg. 
 
 Grosscup, Peter S 712 New York Life Bldg. 
 
 Guerin, M. Henry 1406 Tribune Bldg. 
 
 Hale, Wm. B 1616 Marquette Bldg. 
 
 Hall, James Parker Law School, University of Chicago. 
 
 Harpham, Edwin L 1016 Insurance Exchange 
 
 Harley, Herbert 340-29 S. La Salle St. 
 
 Hart, Louis E 959 The Rookery 
 
 Hay, Wm. Sherman 1220 Stock Exchange Bldg. 
 
 Helmer, Frank A 1217-23 Westminster Bldg. 
 
 11
 
 12 
 
 Holden, Chas. K 1230 Tribune Bldg. 
 
 Holdom, Jesse 1008 Harris Trust Bldg. 
 
 Holt, Eobt. N 720 Westminster Bldg. 
 
 Hopkins, Albert L 826 Federal Bldg. 
 
 Hopkins, John L 1407 Marquette Bldg. 
 
 Hume, Prank L 1702 Majestic Theatre Bldg. 
 
 Ickes, Harold L 1817 Harris Trust Bldg. 
 
 Jeffery, Jas. C 1444 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Jones, W. Clyde 1610 Ft. Dearborn Bldg. 
 
 Kales, Albert M 1616 Marquette Bldg. 
 
 Kehoe, John E 1334 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Kremer, Chas. E 1012 Insurance Exchange 
 
 Lamb, Win. E 1414 Monadnock Bldg. 
 
 Latham, Carl R 1104 Corn Exchange Bank Bldg. 
 
 Lee, Blewett 135 E. 11th Place 
 
 Lee, John H. S 905 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Loesch, Frank J 1540 Otis Bldg. 
 
 Maher, Edward 1520 Unity Bldg. 
 
 Marston, Thomas B 901 Tacoma Bldg. 
 
 Marx, Fred Z 1310 Title & Trust Bldg. 
 
 Mason, George H 1201 Title & Trust Bldg. 
 
 Mayer, Elias 1633 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Mayer, Levy 2010-208 S. La Salle St. 
 
 Medaris, Wm. E 1812 Harris Trust Bldg. 
 
 Mergentheim, Morton A 833 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Meyer, Carl 2010-208 S. La Salle St. 
 
 Miller, Amos C 1018 New York Life Bldg. 
 
 Montgomery, John R 959 The Rookery 
 
 Moses, Jos. W 600 The Temple 
 
 MacChesney, Nathan William 1321 Stock Exchange Bldg. 
 
 McClory, Fred S 804 Straus Bldg. 
 
 McCulloch, Frank H 1104 Merchants Loan & Trust Bldg. 
 
 MeEwen, Willard M 1630 Tribune Bldg. 
 
 McKenzie, Wm. D 1768-208 S. La Salle St. 
 
 McKinney, Hayes 709 Harris Trust Bldg. 
 
 Newman, Jacob 823 Chamber of Commerce Bldg. 
 
 Olson, Judge Harry 917 City Hall 
 
 Packard, George 1522 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Page, Cecil 1322 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Page, S. S 1322 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Peaks, George H 1701 Borland Bldg. 
 
 Piatt, Henry R 2010-208 S. La Salle St. 
 
 Poppenhusen, C. H S23 Chamber of Commerce 
 
 Trussing, Eugene E 1122 Merchants Loan & Trust Bldg.
 
 13 
 
 Ratbbone, Henry R 1309 Title & Trust Bldg. 
 
 Redfield, Robert 1309 Stock Exchange Bldg. 
 
 Reichmann, A. F 1501 Corn Exchange Bank Bldg. 
 
 Richards, John T 1124-72 W. Adams St. 
 
 Riehberg, Donald R 1817 Harris Trust Bid,!.'. 
 
 Robbins, Henry S 814 Home Insurance Bldg. 
 
 Rosenthal, James 1104 Rector Bldg. 
 
 Rush, G. Fred 1 110 Title & Trust Bldg. 
 
 Schlesinger, Elmer 2010-208 S. La Salle St. 
 
 Sears, Nathaniel C 1500 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Sexton, Wm. H 1309 Stock Exchange Bldg. 
 
 Shannon, Angus R 500 Portland Block 
 
 Sheriff, Andrew R 1060 The Rookery 
 
 Silber, Fred D 614 Home Insurance Bldg. 
 
 Sims, Edwin W 808 Marquette Bldg. 
 
 Smoot, H. E 1321 Stock Exchange Bldg. 
 
 Taylor, Thomas, Jr 1209 First National Bank Bldg. 
 
 Thomas, Morris St. P 306 Portland Block 
 
 Tolman, Edgar B 1309 Stock Exchange Bldg. 
 
 Yon Ammon, Fred E 901 Title & Trust Bldg. 
 
 Welch, Albert G 808 Marquette Bldg. 
 
 Wetten, Emil C 800 The Temple 
 
 Wigmore John H 31 West Lake St. 
 
 Wood, Ira C 821 Merchants Loan & Trust Bldg. 
 
 Wormser, Leo F 1400 Fort Dearborn Bldg. 
 
 Wright, Arthur B 1122-112 W. Adams St. 
 
 Young, Hobart P 1104 Corn Exchange Bank Bldg. 
 
 Zane, John M 709 Harris Trust Bldg. 
 
 Zeisler, Sigmund 906 Straus Bldg.
 
 CONSTITUTION 
 
 ARTICLE I. 
 
 An association of members of the bar of Chicago, Illinois, 
 is hereby formed to promote increased efficiency on the part 
 of those who practice as advocates, and to maintain a standard 
 of their professional conduct. 
 
 ARTICLE II. 
 
 The name of the association shall be ' ' The Chicago Society 
 of Advocates. ' ' 
 
 ARTICLE III. 
 
 The membership of the Society shall consist of active, asso- 
 ciate and honorary members. 
 Active members must fulfill the following requirements: 
 
 1. They must have been admitted to the practice of law in 
 this State ; 
 
 2. Have practiced for at least five years in this State or 
 elsewhere, or part of the time in this State and part of the 
 time elsewhere, and be engaged in the actual practice of law 
 in this County ; 
 
 3. Be of good moral character ; and 
 
 •i. During the period of two years preceding application 
 for membership, must have spent a substantial portion of 
 their time in the trial of causes, either in the Courts of first 
 instance or on appeal ; and 
 
 5. Must have obtained a creditable standing in the per- 
 formance of such work. 
 
 15
 
 16 
 
 Associate members: 
 
 The Board of Governors may, by the unanimous vote of 
 its members (not less than eight) present at any of its meet- 
 ings, elect any legal educator of distinction resident in this 
 State, an associate member of the Society. 
 
 Honorary members: 
 
 Iu case any member of the Society shall become a judge 
 of any Court of record, such member shall become an honor- 
 ary member of the Society. Whenever any such honorary 
 member shall cease to be a judge as aforesaid, he shall be 
 restored to active membership in the Society. The Board of 
 Governors may also by the unanimous vote of its members 
 (not less than eight) present at any of its meetings, elect any 
 member of the Society who has attained a pre-eminence in 
 the profession or distinguished himself in the public service, 
 and who shall have permanently retired from active practice, 
 an honorary member of the Society. 
 
 Charter members: 
 
 This Society has been organized by a Committee appointed 
 at a meeting held at the Chicago Club on June 10, 1914. This 
 Committee has invited a number of members of the bar to 
 become Charter members of the Society. An acceptance of 
 such invitation, prior to November 10, 1914, will be equiva- 
 lent to an election. 
 
 ARTICLE IV. 
 
 Nominations for Membership. 
 
 Nominations for membership shall be made in writing to 
 the Board of Governors, under such forms and regulations 
 as it may from time to time prescribe and shall be submitted 
 to the membership of the Society by notice, at least ten days 
 before being voted upon by the Board. Election shall require 
 at least eight votes of the membership of the Board. The 
 name of the person elected shall be placed upon the member- 
 sbip list and reported to the members of the Society.
 
 17 
 
 ARTICLE V. 
 Board of Governors. 
 
 The general conduct of the affairs of the Society, and the 
 exercise of its powers is hereby committed to a Board of Gov- 
 ernors of ten members, who shall be elected by the members 
 of the Society by ballot, by mail, jnst before the annual meet- 
 ing in June, under rules to be fixed by the Board, and shall 
 hold office as follows: 
 
 Of the first Board, two shall hold office for one year, two 
 for two years, two for three years, two for four years, and 
 two for five years ; and the successors of each class shall hold 
 office for five years. 
 
 The election of the first Board shall take place immediately 
 after the organization of the Society, under the direction of 
 the Organization Committee, and the terms of its respective 
 members shall expire in June of the five years following. 
 
 ABTICLE VI. 
 
 Powers of the Board. 
 
 The Board of Governors shall have power, among other 
 things : 
 
 (a) To enact, alter, and amend the by-laws of the Society, 
 and to elect a president and vice-president from their number, 
 and a secretary and treasurer from the membership of the 
 Society, and to define their duties and alter the same from 
 time to time; and to fill all vacancies in the membership of 
 the Board from the time such vacancies shall occur until the 
 next annual meeting of the Society. 
 
 (b) To take such steps as they may deem expedient and 
 proper to carry out the purposes of the Society. 
 
 (c) To make and enforce rules of conduct for the members 
 of the Society, and to promote the observance of such rules 
 by all members of the bar practicing as advocates. 
 
 (d) To investigate, and upon due notice and opportunity 
 to be heard, to determine all complaints against members of 
 the Society, and to admonish, discipline or expel members
 
 18 
 
 according to their judgment by a vote of not less than eight 
 members of the Board, 
 
 (e) Provided, however, that upon the petition of any 
 twenty members of the Society, any such action taken by the 
 Board of Governors shall be submitted by such Board to the 
 vote of the Society as a whole and in respect thereto the action 
 of the Society and of the Board shall be determined by the 
 result of such vote. 
 
 ARTICLE VII. 
 
 Special Duty of Advocates. 
 
 It shall be the duty of members of the Society scrupulously 
 to respect the clientele of lawyers employing them and not 
 to avail themselves of any opportunity to win such clients 
 to themselves. 
 
 ARTICLE VIII. 
 
 Meetings. 
 
 The Society shall hold an annual meeting on the second 
 Tuesday of June in each year, and quarterly meetings on the 
 second Tuesdays of September, December, and March, at six 
 o'clock, P. M. 
 
 Special meetings may be called by a majority of the Board 
 of Governors, or the president, in their discretion. 
 
 ARTICLE IX. 
 
 Relations to Other Organizations. 
 
 Active relations with Courts, Local, State, and National 
 bar associations and similar organizations, and the law schools 
 in this State shall be established for the purpose of aiding 
 in the proper training of advocates, the administration of 
 justice, and the furtherance of legislation to these ends.
 
 19 
 
 AETICLE X. 
 
 Fees and Dues. 
 
 The initiation fee for active and associate members shall 
 be ten dollars, which shall cover the dues until the next an- 
 nual meeting. Thereafter the annual dues of each active and 
 associate member shall be such sum, not to exceed ten dollars, 
 as the Board of Governors shall from time to time prescribe, 
 and shall be payable between October 1st and December 31st 
 of each year. 
 
 AETICLE XL 
 
 Amendments. 
 
 This constitution may be altered, amended or revised by 
 a two-thirds vote of the members present at any meeting, if 
 notice of the proposed action is given at a previous meeting, 
 and also in the notice of the meeting at which such vote is 
 taken.
 
 THE ECONOMIC BASIS FOR A SOCIETY OF ADVO- 
 CATES IN THE CITY OF CHICAGO. 
 
 By Albert M. Kales. 1 
 
 "Wherever competition is free and easily started, no busi- 
 ness enterprise can live if conducted in a wasteful and ineffi- 
 cient manner. Waste and inefficiency puts up the price and 
 then someone who can render the same service at a less cost 
 through achieving greater efficiency and eliminating waste, 
 will render better service; at a less cost. If the waste and in- 
 efficiency be very great and cannot be overcome by those first 
 in the business, the efficient competitor who eliminates the 
 waste will secure the business. Thereafter he will compete 
 only with such others as are able to do the same business with 
 approximately the same efficiency and the same elimination of 
 waste. 
 
 These simple principles are applicable in the legal profes- 
 sion to the same extent as in business. If lawyers are too 
 inefficient as a class and too wasteful, the result is a high cost 
 to the public for their services. Whenever this situation 
 arises with regard to any class of legal business which can 
 be isolated we may expect to find some group of men coming 
 forward to do that class of business more efficiently and with 
 less waste. By this means they will render better service to 
 the public at less cost. In consequence they will secure the 
 larger part of this class of business. This is precisely what 
 has been happening during the last twenty or thirty years. 
 
 Take the case of the abstract, real estate title and convey- 
 ancing business. This was once done entirely by lawyers. 
 Much of it was done by individual lawyers or firms with a so- 
 called general practice. As the bulk of this business increased 
 
 1. Of the Chicago Bar and Professor of Law in Northwestern University. 
 Originally written for the Illinois Law Journal and published in the Jan- 
 uary, 1915, issue. 
 
 21
 
 22 
 
 the spreading of it over the bar at large resulted in inefficiency 
 and in great waste, and a consequently high cost to the public. 
 Every title had to be examined anew upon every transfer. 
 One lawyer, to protect himself from subsequent examiners, 
 had to make so many objections that it was difficult for the 
 client to tell whether to go ahead or to back up. There was no 
 financial responsibility among the lawyers for their opinions. 
 The lawyer who examined titles probably was personally en- 
 gaged in other branches of legal business. Here, then, was a 
 large volume of profitable law business which could be isolated 
 and handled by itself and in which the application of the most 
 elementary principles of business efficiency would improve 
 the service to the public and greatly reduce the cost, while 
 at the same time leaving a handsome margin for profit. What 
 was the result? A few men saw the opportunity presented 
 by the weak position economically of the abstract and title 
 business in the hands of the lawyers. They brought together 
 abstractors, a clerical force, lawyers and executive talent in 
 a single corporation. The work was properly subdivided, 
 specialized and capital invested as an insurance fund. The 
 making of abstracts was highly specialized with resulting 
 efficiency and economy. The examinations of title were spe- 
 cialized. The records kept prevented any duplication of ex- 
 aminations. The special talents of special lawyers were en- 
 gaged for the specially difficult cases. Ample financial re- 
 sponsibility for opinions rendered was provided. Along with 
 the abstract and title business naturally sprang up a trust 
 business, an escrow business, a real estate agency business 
 and a mortgage loan business. 
 
 Inevitably the abstract and title business has been trans- 
 ferred to the title companies and finally has come into the 
 hands of one title company. Its only competitor, is the re- 
 corder, operating under the Torrens Act. The success of an 
 efficiently managed title company was assured so far as its 
 competition with lawyers was concerned, from the very start. 
 The bar in general has been obliged to give up the abstract 
 and title business. Those lawyers who individually are still 
 engaged in that line of work act only in special cases where
 
 23 
 
 ■special talents are required. The general mass of convey- 
 ancing business is clone by the title company. It is incon- 
 ceivable that any one at this day should seriously argue in 
 favor of the disruption of the title company and the spreading 
 of its business over the bar at large. To take such a step 
 would be to exchange efficiency and elimination of waste for 
 a most wasteful and inefficient system of rendering a service 
 to the public. The public would as soon go back to candles. 
 
 The same thing has happened in the field of handling trust 
 -estates and estates of deceased persons. Here also was a class 
 of business entirely in the hands of lawyers thirty years ago. 
 It was handled inefficiently and wastefully. It was inefficient 
 because often handled along with a great deal of other mis- 
 cellaneous business. There was too much duplication of ef- 
 fort. The proper preparation for making investments and 
 •caring for one good-sized estate might be applied to a hun- 
 dred different estates. It would be less wasteful for one man 
 to do this work for a hundred estates than for a hundred law- 
 yers in general practice to do it for each one of a hundred 
 •estates. Then there was lack of financial responsibility. 
 "What happened? Again, far-seeing men observed that here 
 was a branch of law business that could be isolated by itself 
 and handled more efficiently and with less waste and at the 
 same time with complete financial responsibility and still leave 
 a handsome margin of profit. Hence the trust company. It 
 concentrates one class of law business in a few hands. It 
 uses the entire time of lawyers for its routine law business. 
 It has full financial responsibility and by specialization of 
 effort on the business and administrative side uses a vast 
 amount of information and a well-developed judgment for a 
 great many cases. Naturally the bulk of this business, and 
 particularly that which from the size of the estates is valuable, 
 has passed into the hands of the trust companies. The pub- 
 lic would hardly consider again scattering the trust business 
 among the lawyers at large. 
 
 It may be said that the title company and the trust com- 
 panies make a point of employing lawyers who bring them 
 business — the employment being limited to the business
 
 24 
 
 brought. That is true, hut it is simply on the principle of 
 paying a commission to one who originates business. The 
 lawyer who is retained under this custom has ceased to be 
 the man who does the work and becomes the man who brings 
 it in. It is noticeable that when any really important or dif- 
 ficult problem of litigation arises in connection with an estate 
 that has been brought into a trust company, special talent 
 is employed. 
 
 Examine the economic basis for the accident insurance com- 
 panies and the surety and bonding companies and the cor- 
 poi'ation collection agencies. Again you will find that each 
 has isolated a large class of profitable legal business. They 
 have employed capital to furnish financial responsibility. By 
 specialization of effort, organization of a clerical force and 
 the intelligent employment of lawyers whose efforts are spe- 
 cialized, they have done the particular law business so much 
 more efficiently and with so much less waste, that lawyers at 
 large have been obliged to give up the classes of business in 
 question to a very large extent. 
 
 In the largest colorations we find that their legal business 
 is isolated and handled by their own legal department. It 
 would be unthinkable for a corporation like the Harvester 
 Company to scatter its mass of legal business among the law- 
 yers at large, or even to dump it on any one firm. The process 
 would be too wasteful, very likely too inefficient, and conse- 
 quently cost too much. It, therefore, organizes its own legal 
 department, with the efforts of its employees in that depart- 
 ment carefully specialized to get the utmost possible for the 
 amount paid consistent with proper efficiency. Sometimes 
 the legal department of the single corporation is housed along 
 with other executive offices of the corporation, or it may oper- 
 ate in a suite of offices in another office building where inde- 
 pendent firms are housed. It may even operate under what 
 appears to be an independent firm doing a general business. 
 The difference, however, may be very slight. In both instances 
 the corporation's law business has been isolated and is being 
 performed efficiently and with the least waste, by means of 
 a thorough organization and specialization of effort.
 
 25 
 
 Then we have the situation of large corporations often allied 
 in interest and in the same line of business, but still with sep- 
 arate organizations — for instance, railroad corporations. 
 There is a central legal department of each railway in another 
 city or the railway is too small to maintain any high-priced 
 legal department of its own. Here is the opportunity for the 
 very large firm to gather in all such railways and do all the 
 law business for them in a given district., By organizing for 
 the doing of a large business of the same general sort effi- 
 ciency is produced and waste eliminated and money saved. 
 The firm can do all the legal business for each railway at a less 
 cost than the railway could do it for itself and at the same 
 time make a handsome profit. 
 
 The same thing happens with interstate commerce business 
 for shippers. Here is a new class of legal business. It does 
 not have to be taken away from the bar at large because the 
 bar in general never had it. It appeared suddenly and in 
 considerable volume. It was at once isolated by particular 
 lawyers and firms and efficiency attained and waste eliminated 
 in the handling of it by the proper organization of large firms. 
 
 The basis for an advocates' society is the same as that for 
 the title company, the trust company, the casualty company, 
 the surety company, the legal department of a large corpora- 
 tion and a large firm which handles for an annual payment all 
 the legal work of several independent corporations in the same 
 line of business. All alike respond to a public demand for 
 increased efficiency and the saving of waste in some branch 
 of work done by lawyers, and for the rendering of a better 
 service to the public at a less cost. 
 
 Litigation in Chicago is large enough in bulk to justify the 
 effort to isolate it for the purpose of handling it more effi- 
 ciently and with less cost. The controversies which must be 
 settled by a judgment in court number from one hundred and 
 fifty thousand upwards every year. The larger proportion 
 of these do not, of course, require any service from advocates. 
 But among so many units of judicial business there are enough 
 contested causes to justify the devotion of from one hundred 
 to three hundred members of the bar to such work exclusively. 
 
 At present the efficiency in a vast amount of contested lit-
 
 26 
 
 igation is very low indeed. This does not necessarily reflect 
 upon the capacity of the men who are doing it. It arises prin- 
 cipally from the fact that a great deal of contested litigation 
 is handled by lawyers who go to court too seldom to become 
 efficient. 
 
 The wasteful manner in which the courts permit litigation to 
 be conducted is due in great part to the way the lawyer's busi- 
 ness is conducted. The courts accommodate themselves to 
 the fact that a great many lawyers with a very few appear- 
 ances each make up the total number of appearances in the 
 courts and that there is a low standard of efficiency among 
 them. The fundamental source of waste is lack of specializa- 
 tion of effort among lawyers. The lawyer with a few appear- 
 ances each year in contested matters is obliged to cover the 
 whole subject of practice and procedure and the substantive 
 law for each case. On the other hand, an advocate handling 
 jury trials uses over and over again his knowledge of practice 
 and procedure, the proper handling of witnesses, the law of 
 evidence and in a less degree the rules of substantive law. 
 The same is true of other branches of practice which are dis- 
 tinct from jury trials. The application of the principle of spe- 
 cialization of effort and the repeated use of the same inform- 
 ation with regard to litigated cases effects an enormous sav- 
 ing of human effort. 
 
 The men who achieve this saving can furnish a more efficient 
 service to the public at a less cost. A public duty as well as an 
 economic law calls for volunteers in this field. All that is 
 needed is a practical plan for organizing to meet the obvious 
 and insistent demand. 
 
 What kind of an organization can be used? What is its 
 object? and how is it to accomplish that object? These are 
 practical questions. 
 
 An advocates' society should have as its charter members 
 lawyers who are interested in the promotion of a profession 
 of advocacy — who believe that there is a sound economic de- 
 mand for it and that its establishment is for the benefit of the 
 public and the administration of justice. The charter mem- 
 bers need not all be lawyers with special practice as advocates.
 
 27 
 
 Prominent and influential lawyers who are not advocates may 
 yet desire to promote the existence of a profession of advo- 
 cacy. Future members of such a society should, however, be 
 lawyers who are more in court in the trial of contested cases 
 than is the average practitioner. Only by such a limitation of 
 membership can a definite interest on the part of members in 
 the promotion of a profession of advocacy be assured. The 
 organization must aim to give to advocates the greatest op- 
 portunity for individual development and success. It must 
 insist upon the freest competition among advocates and their 
 complete independence in action of each other. Since these 
 principles apply at least to the future membership in a society 
 of advocates, such a society must be a voluntary association 
 not for pecuniary profit. 
 
 The object of such an organization is to assist in the estab- 
 lishment of a profession of advocacy. The existence of such 
 a profession necessarily involves the employment of some 
 lawyers as advocates by other lawyers. No distinct profes- 
 sion of advocacy could arise without the development of 
 this practice. The reason is that only a small part of the cli- 
 ent's legal business involves litigation. The lawyer who han- 
 dles the client's legal business which does not involve litiga- 
 tion has no time to develop efficiency in the handling of litiga- 
 tion or the conduct of it profitably to himself without too high 
 a cost to himself or his client. For the same reason the law- 
 yer who devotes himself to advocacy has no time for the hand- 
 ling of a vast amount of legal business of clients which does 
 not require the activities of an advocate. It follows, there- 
 fore, that a profession of advocacy cannot exist unless the 
 lawyer who is in contact with the client with respect to nine- 
 tenths of the client's legal business makes a practice of em- 
 ploying a suitable advocate for the actual trial of the one- 
 tenth of the client's legal business which involves litigation. 
 When, therefore, we say that the object of a society of advo- 
 cates is to promote the establishment of a profession of ad- 
 vocacy, what we mean is that its object is to extend the prac- 
 tice among lawyers generally, of employing, in contested liti-
 
 28 
 
 gated cases, members of the bar who make more of a profes- 
 sion of advocacy tlian does the average practitioner. 
 
 The practical steps now available for accomplishing this 
 object are twofold: First, to settle the terms which will be 
 satisfactory to the lawyers at large, as well as the advocates, 
 upon which advocates are to be employed by other lawyers and 
 to give publicity to those terms, as well as assurances of their 
 enforcement so far as the lawyers practicing as advocates 
 are concerned. Second, to present to the public and to the 
 lawyers generally those members of the bar whose practice 
 is already such as to warrant their being employed by other 
 lawyers as advocates and who are willing to accept the terms 
 upon which advocates are to be employed by other lawyers; 
 and from year to year to add to the list as rapidly as other 
 members of the bar may qualify, and to drop from the list 
 those members of the bar who have ceased to qualify. 
 
 The economic demand for the advocate means that his em- 
 ployment by other lawyers is already fundamentally attrac- 
 tive. His services are already desired because he can render 
 better service at less cost than the man with a large and profit- 
 able clientage who goes seldom into court. The general terms 
 of such employment alone remain to be settled. 
 
 Of these the most important is the assurance on the part of 
 all lawyers practicing as advocates that they will scrupulously 
 respect the clientele of lawyers employing them and not avail 
 themselves of any opportunity to win such clients to them- 
 selves. As a matter of fact it is the entire lack of assurance 
 of the observance and enforcement of this rule of conduct 
 that today prevents the development of a profession of ad- 
 vocacy. While the economic demand for advocates presses, 
 the lawyers at large hold back because of the fear — no doubt 
 justified by too many disagreeable exjDeriences of their own 
 and others — that to employ an advocate means the loss of a 
 client. The assurance of the utmost loyalty by the advocate 
 to the interests of the lawyer who employs him is a sine qua 
 non of the existence of a profession of advocacy. 
 
 The rule of loyalty on the part of the advocate to the law- 
 yer who employs him is largely self-enforcing because the ad-
 
 29 
 
 vocates themselves must recognize that without its strict ob- 
 servance the practice of their profession is impossible. An 
 organization of advocates which gave publicity to this rule, 
 enforced it against its own members by expulsion and gave 
 publicity to its violation by others, would be doing all that is 
 necessary to enforce its observance. 
 
 It is important that the employing lawyer should be diligent 
 in the preparation of his case for trial and that this prepara- 
 tion should be done in his office by him, or under his direction, 
 or under the direction of his partners or assistants. In most 
 cases the employing lawyer should start the suit and place 
 the cause in the hands of the advocate fully prepared only 
 when the trial is imminent and all negotiations for settle- 
 ment are unavailing. Such a mode of proceeding is, of course, 
 not at all imperative, like the rule of loyalty on the part of 
 the advocate toward the employing lawyer. It is important, 
 however, to the lawyer employing the advocate in his relation 
 to his client. If the client's lawyer dumps the incomplete and 
 raw materials of a law suit upon another lawyer and then de- 
 clines all further responsibility and either refuses or is unable 
 to do any effective lawyer's work, the lawyer who is advocate 
 enough to be employed at all must turn the whole matter over 
 to partners or office assistants for complete preparation. This 
 frequently involves constant contact with the client and the 
 witnesses and it means that the employing lawyer is soon re- 
 duced to complete subordination in the matter and at the time 
 of the trial is practically useless. Under such circunistances 
 the lawyer's client will lose respect for him and confidence in 
 him and even if the advocate employed exercised the highest 
 degree of loyalty to the employing lawyer and refused any em- 
 ployment direct from the client at a subsequent time, yet the 
 employing lawyer will in all probability lose his client. It 
 is also of great value to the advocate that he should be em- 
 ployed by able lawyers who can prepare a case thoroughy for 
 trial and who can assist and even take a prominent part in 
 the trial if necessary. Such preparation means far greater 
 chances of success in the case. It means also that the advocate
 
 30 
 
 does not have to maintain an office force for the detailed prep- 
 aration of other lawyers' cases. 
 
 The question of fees for the advocate must, of course, be the 
 subject of special arrangement in each case. With the estab- 
 lishment of any profession of advocacy there will be men prac- 
 ticing as advocates who have various degrees of experience 
 and success and whose charges will vary sufficiently to enable 
 any lawyer to find satisfactory talent for the advocate's fees 
 which the case will bear. The client's lawyer will receive his 
 usual fees for the preparation of the case and for such assist- 
 ance as he may render at the trial if he desires to appear in it 
 as an advocate. The advocate will receive his fair compensa- 
 tion for the preparation and conduct of the trial. This does not 
 mean double fees. It means that the entire fee which is now 
 paid to the client's lawyer for the preparation and conduct of 
 the case in court will be divided, with this difference, however, 
 that since the division of labor means greater efficiency and 
 less waste of time and energy, both in preparation and in the 
 trial, the total fee should be smaller, or else the same total 
 fee should be divided with a larger margin of profit to both 
 the client's lawyer and the advocate. 
 
 The presenting to the public and to the lawyers generally 
 of those who are competent to practice as advocates and actu- 
 ally practicing as such may be accomplished in a direct and 
 proper manner as follows : 
 
 The advocates' society, when formed, should send out to 
 all the members of the bar in the locality who have been in 
 practice for — let us say — five years, a request for information 
 for the purpose of ascertaining who are practicing as advo- 
 cates in the trial of contested cases to a greater extent than 
 the average lawyer; whether such practice follows special 
 lines, and what the attitude of such a practitioner is toward 
 the principal terms above mentioned regarding' the employ- 
 ment of advocates by other lawyers. 
 
 Each lawyer would be asked to give the title and nature of 
 all of the contested causes in the trial of which he had been 
 engaged during a period of— say— two years preceding the 
 request for information. He would be asked as to each case
 
 31 
 
 "whether he had conducted it in chief or as a junior; before 
 what judge it was tried, and how long the trial took. He would 
 be asked also as to each case whether he conducted it in the 
 appellate court or in the supreme court, or both, and if so, 
 where the case was reported. He would further be asked as 
 to each case whether he had been employed by another lawyer 
 or a firm of which he was not a member and if so, to give the 
 name. 
 
 Then the following questions might be asked : 
 
 "Do you wish to be classified as an advocate with (1) a gen- 
 eral practice in cases tried with or without a jury and whether 
 civil or criminal, or (2) a jury trial practice in civil and crim- 
 inal cases, or (3) a jury trial practice in civil cases, or (4) a 
 jury trial practice in criminal cases, or (5) a trial practice in 
 chancery causes and causes tried without a jury, or (6) a prac- 
 tice in appeal cases only? 
 
 "If you do not wish to be classified in any of the above 
 ways, state how you would prefer to be classified. 
 
 "Do you wish to indicate your general rule as to a minimum 
 per diem charge? If so, what is it ? 
 
 "What proportion of your total professional income is de- 
 rived from the conduct of contested litigation in the courts? 
 
 "What proportion of your total time spent in professional 
 activity is consumed in the preparation and conduct of con- 
 tested litigation in the courts? 
 
 "Will you pledge yourself 'scrupulously to respect the 
 clientele of lawyers employing you and not to avail yourself 
 of any opportunity to win such client to yourself?' 
 
 "Do you desire that as a general rule cases brought to you 
 as an advocate by other lawyers should be thoroughly and 
 completely prepared for trial in the office of the employing 
 lawyer and that your employment should commence when 
 efforts to settle the case have been abandoned and the trial 
 is imminent?" 
 
 When such questions reach the members of the bar we may 
 assume that those who have no practice in the handling of 
 contested cases in the courts or who have no more than the 
 average practitioner at the present time, will throw the in-
 
 quiry into the waste basket. It is probable that some of the 
 older members of the bar, though well qualified to take a lead- 
 ing place on any list of advocates, will not be sufficiently in- 
 terested to reply. But the men who are now actively practic- 
 ing as advocates, together with those who spend a major por- 
 tion of their time in the trial of contested cases in court and 
 the principal part of whose professional income is derived 
 from this work, will have a vital interest in responding to the 
 inquiry. No question is asked which such men would have 
 the slightest objection to answering. Younger men who have 
 talents and ambitions in the same direction and have made 
 a start, will be glad of the opportunity to give the information 
 requested. Out of a bar of several thousand, several hundred 
 replies would probably be forthcoming and from the informa- 
 tion a list, valuable alike to lawyers and advocates, could be 
 compiled. To this should be attached the terms upon which 
 advocates should be employed, with special reference to the 
 duty of loyalty on the part of the advocate to the employing 
 lawyer and the desirability in general of the employing law- 
 yer preparing the case fully and completely for trial, and em- 
 ploying the advocate only after the case is pending and efforts 
 to settle it have proved futile. A copy of the list should be 
 sent to each member of the bar and the list published in the 
 lawyers' directory. Thereafter it will be one of the important 
 functions of the advocates ' society to revise and add to the list 
 from year to year. 
 
 One thing a society of advocates must avoid. It should not 
 justify the impression that it is organized to exploit and ad- 
 vertise its own members or to develop a demand for their em- 
 ployment exclusively. Such a society, though open to all mem- 
 bers of the bar who qualify, will have to start with only a pro- 
 portion of those who are qualified to practice as advocates. 
 It may indeed contain in its membership some' who are not 
 so qualified at all, but who are sincerely interested in the es- 
 tablishment of a profession of advocacy. Such a society is 
 not organized to promote the fortunes of its own members. 
 It is necessarily organized to devise ways and means of answer- 
 ing an economic demand of the community — a demand that the
 
 33 
 
 important work of conducting litigation shall be done with 
 more efficiency and with less waste. To that end its duty is 
 to canvass the entire bar for every member who is qualified 
 to practice as an advocate and who is desirous of being pre- 
 sented to the public and the lawyers as engaged in practice 
 as an advocate and who is willing to abide by the legitimate 
 and proper terms of employment as an advocate.
 
 "THE LEGAL PROFESSION IN ONTARIO 
 
 AND 
 
 THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA." 
 
 By 
 
 The Honourable William Renwick Riddell, LL. D., F. R. 
 Hist. Soc, Etc., Justice of the Supreme Court of Ontario. 
 
 (Memo. At the request of "The Chicago Society of 
 Advocates," Mr. Justice Riddell addressed them on "The 
 Legal Profession in Ontario" at their inaugural meeting, 
 November 9, 1914. The following contains the substance of 
 his address with some additions, and has been prepared by 
 Mr. Justice Riddell at the instance of the president of the 
 Society.) 
 
 So long as Canada remained a French possession there was 
 no distinction in the legal profession. The same person 
 might and often did exercise the function of Advocate or 
 Barrister, Notaire (notary) and even Arpenteur (land 
 surveyor). 
 
 No change was made in that respect by the victors on the 
 Conquest in 1759-60, or by the Royal Proclamation of October 
 7, 1763, which introduced into Canada the English Law, Civil 
 and Criminal. This Proclamation also established a 
 "Province of Quebec" which included in its area not only 
 what is now the Province of Quebec, but also what was after- 
 wards the Province of Upper Canada and is now the Province 
 of Ontario. When the Quebec Act was passed (1774), 14 
 George III, c. 83 1 , it was not considered advisable to modify 
 the existing practice. 
 
 ■In Ontario, as In England, It is the custom to cite Statutes, not as of the year 
 No»M Domini, but as of the year of the reign of the regnant monarch when they were 
 passed. A very convenient practice has however sprung up of prefixing the year of 
 our Lord. 
 
 35
 
 36 
 
 But, April 30, 1785, an Ordinance was made by the 
 Lieutenant Governor, Henry Hamilton 2 , being Ordinance of 
 25 George HI, c. 4 ; this by Article 1 enacted that thenceforth 
 no one should be commissioned, appointed or permitted to 
 practice as a barrister, advocate, solicitor, attorney or proctor 
 at law who had not served during the space of five years under 
 a contract in writing with some advocate or attorney duly 
 admitted and practicing in the Courts in the Province or else- 
 where in His Majesty's Dominions or for six years with some 
 clerk or register of a Court of Common Pleas or Court of 
 Appeals in the Province, with a proviso in favour of those 
 called to the Bar or admitted to practice as an advocate or 
 attorney elsewhere in the Empire. The candidate must also 
 have been examined by some of the first and most able 
 barristers advocates or attorneys in the presence of the Chief 
 Justice of the Province or two or more Judges of the Courts 
 of Common Pleas, and be certified by the Chief Justice or the 
 Judges as of fit capacity and character to be admitted to 
 practice law. 
 
 Article 2 makes a similar provision for a notary to serve 
 five years with a notary, and to be examined by some of the 
 eldest notaries in the presence of the Chief Justice of the 
 Province or two or more judges of the Court of Common 
 Pleas of the District wherein he served his clerkship, and to 
 be approved by him or them. 
 
 Article 6 provides that thenceforth barristers, advocates, 
 solicitors, attorneys or proctors at law, and also land sur- 
 veyors, should not practice as notaries ; that no notary is to 
 act as land surveyor or barrister, etc.; "that these several 
 occupations of practising the law in His Majesty's Courts 
 in this Province * * * and of notary and of land sur- 
 veyor shall be held and exercised separately and by different 
 
 ^Hamilton first appears in the History of this Continent as Governor of Detroit 
 in -1777. The following year he captured Vlncennes whose commander Helm was taken 
 prisoner with a small "force of defenders. The well-known George Rogers Clark 
 shortly afterwards besieged the fort ; and Hamilton was in his turn forced to sur- 
 render. He was treated by Clark with much barbarity, and on Jefferson's order was 
 sent handcuffed to Williamsburg where his treatment was still worse. Probably as 
 an effect of a letter from Governor Haldimand to Washington, Hamilton was paroled ; 
 and he got to England in 1781. He was made Lieutenant Governor of Quebec in 
 1784, filling that position a little less than a year. He was a man of no great capacity 
 and but little judgment, although perfectly honest and sincerely desirous of doing hi9 
 duty. It is probable that the ordinance of April 30, 1785, was due to the influence 
 of the British newcomers in the Province.
 
 37 
 
 persons to the end and purpose that the functions and duties 
 of the one may not interfere with the other." All practi- 
 tioners were given twelve months to elect which branch of the 
 profession they would follow 3 . 
 
 A strong protest was made against this ordinance by some 
 of the French-Canadian practitioners, but in vain. The dis- 
 tinction between the practitioner in the Courts and the notary 
 still obtains in the present Province of Quebec. 
 
 In 1788 four Courts of Common Pleas were established in 
 the territory afterwards the Province of Upper Canada, but 
 then part of the Province of Quebec, one for each district; 
 they were, of course, under the same law and practice. 
 
 In 1791 was passed the Act 31 George III, c. 31, commonly 
 called the Canada Act or Constitutional Act, which divided 
 the vast territory of the Province of Quebec into two prov- 
 inces, the western being called Upper Canada and the eastern 
 Lower Canada, each with its own Parliament and Lieutenant 
 Governor. 
 
 The first Act of the first Parliament of Upper Canada 
 (1792) 32 George 3, c. 1 (U. C.) was to introduce the English 
 Civil Law; but no change was then made in the constitution 
 of the profession. There were not many in the Province skilled 
 in the English Law ; and, accordingly in 1784 was passed an 
 Act, 34 George III, c. 4 (U. C.) which authorized the Governor 
 to grant a license to any number not exceeding sixteen British 
 subjects to practice as attornies and advocates. This may 
 have been, and probably was, due to the institution of the 
 Court of King's Bench for the Province by the same Statute. 
 The Act suspended for two years the operation within Upper 
 Canada of the Ordinance of 1785. 4 During all this time and 
 until the coming into force of the Act next to be mentioned, all 
 practitioners were called "to the degree of an Advocate and to 
 that of an Attorney. ' ' The original roll of the Court of King's 
 
 "The Ordinance is printed in full in both English and French in the volume of 
 "Ordinances • • • the Province of Quebec," 1777 (in the Judges' Library at 
 Osgoode Hall) pp. 67-68. 
 
 •Those who so received a license were !n effect given a monopoly of the practice as 
 they only could charge for their services; and the list Included most if not all of the 
 lawyers and some others.
 
 38 
 
 Bench, still extant, sets out the oath to be taken by the 
 applicant and the "degree" conferred. 
 
 The Act of 1797, 37 George III, c. 13, (U.C.),wasthe begin- 
 ning of our present system. That Act, passed on the 3rd of 
 July, 1797, provided that it should be lawful for the persons 
 now admitted to practice law, and practising at the Bar in the 
 Province, to form themselves into a society to be called the 
 Law Society of Upper Canada, "as well as for the establish- 
 ment of order amongst themselves, as for the purpose of 
 securing to the Province and the profession a learned and 
 honorable body 5 , to assist their fellow subjects as occasion 
 may require, and to support and maintain the Constitution of 
 the said Province." The Society was authorized to frame 
 Rules and Begulations (under inspection of the Judges of 
 the Province as Visitors of the Society) for its own govern- 
 ment; to appoint the six senior members or more, for the 
 time being, and from time to time as Governors or Benchers 
 (of whom the Attorney General and Solicitor General for the 
 time being were to be two), and also to appoint a Librarian 
 and a Treasurer. 
 
 They were to meet in Newark (Niagara-on-the-Lake) on 
 July 17, 1797, to frame such Rules and Regulations. 
 
 Each person practicing at the Bar was allowed to take one 
 clerk for the purpose of instructing him in the knowledge of 
 the laws. 
 
 Except those who were practitioners at the time of the 
 passing of the Act, no one should be permitted to prac- 
 tice at the Bar, unless he had been entered of and admitted into 
 the Society as a Student of the Laws, and had remained on the 
 Books of the Society for five years, conformed to all its Rules 
 and Regulations and been duly called and admitted as a 
 Barrister according to the Constitutions and establishment of 
 the Society. Proviso in favor of those who had practised at 
 the Bar elsewhere in His Majesty's dominions, and the time 
 actually served under articles before the passing of the Act 
 should count as part of the five years, pro tanto. 
 
 »In view of the adoption by all Govermental departments and most literary Can- 
 adians of the "English" spelling of such words as "honour", etc.. it is not without 
 interest to note that in the printed copies of the Statute this word is spelled without 
 the "u."
 
 39 
 
 One might become and act "merely as an Attorney or 
 Solicitor" after due service for five years under articles to an 
 attorney and "standing in the books of the Society" for three 
 years. 
 
 This Statute for the first time in our Province established 
 the distinction between Barrister and Attorney, and since it 
 came into effect no one (with an exception shortly to be noted), 
 who had not been called to the Bar by and received the degree 
 of Barrister-at-Law from the Law Society of Upper Canada, 
 has ever been heard by the Courts of the Province. The 
 Courts have no power to permit any other to be heard. There 
 is no international or interprovineial comity or courtesy per- 
 mitting such a course. 
 
 Here at the beginning of the Society is found a marked dif- 
 ference between it and the Inns of Court in London. They 
 have no concern with attorneys (or solicitors), every attorney 
 or solicitor must in Upper Canada have been on the books 
 of the Society for three years, (we shall have occasion later to 
 notice the important change made in 1822 by the Statute 2 
 Geo. 4, C.5U.C). 
 
 Before discussing the functions of the Society, I shall give 
 a brief record of its history to the present time. 
 
 Ten practitioners met at Wilson's Hotel, Newark, on July 
 17, 1797, and organized the Law Society of Upper Canada; 
 and upon that day conferred the degree of Barrister at Law 
 upon all the practitioners who applied therefor (including 
 themselves). One other (William Weekes) applied two years 
 after (in 1799), and received the degree; the remaining four 
 never applied for and never received it. These four con- 
 stitute the sole exception to the rule that no one could since 
 1797 address our Courts except those called by the Society. 
 
 The Statute did not make the Society a corporation; but 
 it was a mere association of gentlemen with well-defined 
 functions. The absence of incorporation became a drawback, 
 and in 1822 the Act 2 George IV, c. 5 (U. C.) declared "the 
 Treasurer and Benchers of the Law Society for the time being 
 and their successors * * to be one body corporate and 
 
 politic."
 
 40 
 
 This led to some difficulty, which, however, was got over by 
 the Eesolution of the Benchers in Convocation in June, 1831, 
 Trinity Term, 1 and 2 Wm. IV, that all Barristers and 
 Students-at-Law entered in the Books of the Society were 
 still members of the Law Society of Upper Canada, though 
 not members of the Corporation of the Law Society of Upper 
 Canada; and this state of affairs still continues; the Treas- 
 urer and Benchers alone are the Corporation, but all students 
 and barristers duly entered are members of the Society. 
 
 The Government of the Society was by the original Act 
 to be by Benchers or Governors appointed by the Society, 
 the six senior members or more for the time being, of whom 
 the Attorney General and Solicitor General were to be two. 
 At its first meeting the members present appointed the Attor- 
 ney General and Solicitor General and the four senior 
 barristers as Benchers. At a subsequent meeting November 
 9, 1799, all the existing barristers were appointed Benchers. 
 Thereafter for a time the practice was followed of the exist- 
 ing Benchers appointing a member of the Society from time 
 to time as a Bencher, his appointment being communicated 
 to him by the Treasurer. No Statute, Rule or Resolution can 
 be found authorizing this method of election, but no com- 
 plaint seems ever to have been made of the Benchers taking 
 this power out of the hands of the Society, who alone could 
 appoint under the Act of 1797. Of course each new Attorney 
 General and Solicitor General was, according to the Statute, 
 appointed forthwith after receiving his Patent. 
 
 This self-perpetuating system was put an end to in 1871 
 by the Ontario Act 34 Vic. c. 15, which instituted a bench of 
 thirty Benchers to be elected by ballot by all the Barristers 
 on the Boll, and also of ex officio Benchers, the Attorney 
 General of the Province and all ex-Attorneys General and 
 ex-Solicitors General (there is now no Solicitor General of 
 the Province), and all retired Judges of the Superior Courts. 
 The elected members hold office for five years, when there is 
 a new election. 
 
 A natural effect of this was that the older and better known 
 Barristers were elected term after term, and there was little
 
 41 
 
 chance of a young man obtaining the position of Bencher. To 
 avoid this, it was in 1910 enacted by 10 Edw. VII. c. 76 (Ont.) 
 that all those who had been elected at four quinquennial elec- 
 tions should be ex-officio Benchers, thus leaving the field open 
 for the younger men. (It had a few years before by (1900), 63 
 Vic. c. 20, s. I, been provided that every one who had for seven 
 consecutive years held the office of Treasurer of the Society 
 should be an ex-officio Bencher.) 
 
 The original Act had authorized the Society to appoint a 
 Treasurer. This position did not mean even then simply one 
 who cared for the funds of the Society, but one who was the 
 Head of the Society, President and Chairman. This was an 
 adoption of the terminology of the English Inns of Court 8 . 
 
 The Society at the first meeting resolved that "the Benchers 
 according to seniority take upon themselves the Treasurer- 
 ship of the said Society annually." We find no close adher- 
 ence to this rule. The Attorney General was the first Treas- 
 urer, and for one year only; then the Solicitor General 7 for 
 three ; a prominent member of the bar for four ; then the new 
 Attorney General for one year; the new Solicitor Genei-al 
 for five years ; another prominent member of the bar for four 
 years ; the next Attorney General for four, and his successor 
 for one. Then July 8, 1819, was passed a rule that the 
 Treasurer should be chosen annually in Michaelmas Term by 
 the majority of the votes of the members then present. July 
 2, 1831, the date was changed to Hilary Term, and September 
 1, 1859, back to Michaelmas. 
 
 The Statute of 1871, which made Benchers elective, fixed 
 
 •See for example Herbert's Antiquities of the Inns of Court and Chancery, 1804, 
 p. 228. "The officer of Treasurer is of considerable importance * • • He Is the 
 Supreme Officer of the whole Society and has the regulation of its concerns. He 
 admits gentlemen into the Society, etc. 
 
 The fact that the Attorney-General John White was an English Barrister, prob- 
 ably accounts for the language adopted. White later (January 1800) was shot and 
 killed in a duel with a gentleman whose wife he had traduced. 
 
 'This was Robert I. D. Gray, the son of a major In the British service. He was 
 a member of the House of Commons of Upper Canada, for the second and third Par- 
 liaments. 
 
 In October 1804 he accompanied the Judge, Mr. Justice Cochran, another mem- 
 ber of the Bar, the High Constable of York (Toronto), two Indian interpreters, the 
 witnesses and an Indian Ogetonlcut who was captured on Toronto Island (then a 
 peninsula), and was to be conveyed by the Government schooner Speedy to the assize 
 town Newcastle (now Presqu'isle) for trial. A storm sprang up, and the vessel was 
 lost with all on board, nothing but a hen-coop coming to land. 
 
 It is interesting to note that Grey left certain property to his black servant 
 John Baker who was afterwards at the battle of Waterloo as a British soldier and 
 v/ho survived till 1871, the last of all who have been slaves in Canada.
 
 42 
 
 the date for election of Treasurer; the first term after the 
 election of the new Bench and in Easter Term of each year. 
 This still is the rule. 
 
 So much for the Law Society itself ; we shall now consider its 
 dealings with the Bar. 
 
 The first Bule of the Society appointed Benchers ; the second 
 was that every member of the Society should enter into 
 a bond with the Treasurer to pay the sum of £5 (=$20) 
 annually so long as he should continue a member of the 
 Society 8 . In 1831 this was reduced to 11-8 (=$2.33) per term, 
 or $9.33 per annum, payable on or before the last day of every 
 term in each year; and in 1833 to 2-6 (=$0.50) per term or 
 $2.00 per annum, payable on or before the first day of 
 Michaelmas term, i. e., the third Monday in November. This 
 rule is still in force for Barristers ; solicitors now pay $15 per 
 annum. The third rule of 1797 was that every student in his 
 admission to the Society should pay the sum of £10 (=$40) 
 and the further sum of £20 (=$80) when called to the Bar, 
 and enter into a bond to pay annually £5 (=$20). The annual 
 payment was reduced after call as we have seen in 1831 and 
 1833. Whether the fee of £5 annually exacted by Bule 2 of 
 1797 was exacted of the student as a member of the Law 
 Society before his call, does not very clearly appear 9 . 
 
 The statutory title of the student admitted on the books 
 of the Society was " Student-of-the-Laws ; " this included both 
 those proceeding to the degree of Barrister-at-Law and those 
 intending to become an attorney — technically the former were 
 Students-at-Law, the latter Articled Clerks (the distinction is 
 not always observed). To become a Barrister there was no 
 necessity to serve under articles; to become an Attorney it 
 required five years actual service under articles. 
 
 From the very beginning in by far the greater number of 
 cases, an applicant for admission upon the Books of the 
 Society was under articles at the time. Nearly every student 
 became both Barrister and Attorney, but from the first, as 
 
 8 It must not be forgotten that all students duly admitted on the books were and 
 are members of the Society. 
 
 •January 11, 1808, a rule was passed rescinding previous rules as to fees and re- 
 quiring every member to pay £5 ($20) ; every student upon admission to the book* 
 of the Society £5, and the same sum upon being called to the Bar.
 
 43 
 
 now, there were a very few who became Attorneys or 
 Barristers, but not both. 
 
 There was at first no entrance examination; but the mem- 
 ber proposing a student (generally his master) would certify 
 that the applicant was in his opinion qualified by education 
 principles and habits of life to become a member of the Law 
 Society. 
 
 In 1808 (Hilary Term, 58 Geo. 3), a rule was passed that no 
 person should be admitted a member unless he should declare 
 to the Society upon his honor that his application was to 
 enable him to become a resident practitioner, but does not 
 seem to have received the sanction of the Judges. No trace of 
 such a declaration appears in the early Summary of Provi- 
 sions relating to admission of members, in the Form of Peti- 
 tion prescribed or in the minutes of the Law Society. Up to 
 1803, the applicant was in practice proposed and admitted at 
 the same meeting; thereafter the proposer was required to 
 give a term's notice of his intention to present the candidate 10 . 
 
 Applicants must still have their names posted conspicuously 
 for thirty days by the Secretary of the Society, and if no 
 objection be taken they are entered as of the term in which 
 their application was made. Curiously enough much the same 
 practice was followed in the case of three applicants in Easter 
 Term, 56 Geo. 3, 1816. 
 
 In 1820 Hilary Term, 60 Geo. 3, a rule was passed that after 
 that term all applicants for admission should be required in 
 presence of the Benchers to give a written translation of a 
 portion of Cicero's Orations or perform such other exercise 
 as might satisfy the Society of their acquaintance with Latin 
 and English composition, "and that no person who cannot 
 
 "John Anderson was the last to be presented under the old practice, Easter Term 
 41, Geo. 3, 13 April 1801. John Macdonell. afterwards Attorney General of Upper 
 Canada, the first under the new, Hilary Term, 43 Geo. 3, 6th April 1803. Macdonell 
 was Adjutant to Sir Isaac Brock in the campaign of 1812 and was fatally wounded at 
 the Battle of Queenston Heights, gallantly lighting for his country.
 
 44 
 
 give these proofs of a liberal education shall hereafter be 
 admitted upon their books." 11 
 
 In 1821, a voluntary association called the Advocate Society 
 was formed in York (Toronto) by students-at-law for discus- 
 sions, moot courts, etc., but it lasted only a very short time, 
 going the way of all such voluntary organizations 12 . 
 
 In 1825 (July 1st of Trinity Term, 6 Geo. 4), the Law 
 Society took a further step, and required all candidates for 
 admission on its books to exhibit in his examination "a gen- 
 eral knowledge of English, Grecian and Eoman History, a 
 becoming acquaintance with one of the ancient Eoman poets, 
 as Virgil, Horace or Juvenal, and the like acquaintance with 
 some of the celebrated prose works of the ancients such as 
 
 u It is at least interesting to note that in examination of a candidate to practice 
 medicine for long after this time, the practice seems to have been to examine in 
 Latin first — a sort of matriculation examination — and to proceed with the profes- 
 sional subjects only if the candidate exhibited some familiarity with that language. 
 We find the Board of Toronto writing the sister Boards in Montreal and Quebec in 
 April 1847 : 
 
 "The course this Board pursues in the examination of candidates is as follows : 
 1st. Some acquaintance with the Latin language is required. With this view, 
 If the candidate cannot construe some paragraphs of Gregory's Conspectus, a portion 
 of the Pharmacopoeia Londinensis or a Latin written prescription is substituted ; 
 in the event of a total failure in these, the professional examination is not proceeded 
 in. If the Latin examination is satisfactory, then follow," professional subjects. 
 
 It may seem anomalous to begin a professional examination with an enquiry into 
 the knowledge of Latin possessed by the candidate ; but it must be borne in mind 
 that in those days everyone of education had some knowledge of Latin — and an ig- 
 norance of that language indicated if it did not absolutely prove a lack of general 
 culture. 
 
 "Examination for License to Practice Sixty Years ago" by Hon. Mr. Justice Rid- 
 dell, Canada Lancet, June 1913. 
 
 After this rule of 1820 the entries in the Law Society's Books read, "the Society 
 being satisfied of his qualifications do admit him on the Books accordingly." 
 
 The last to be entered without examination was John Muirhead, and the first to 
 be entered after examination was Marcus F. Whitehead, Nos. 82 and 86 on the Common 
 Roll, (not the Barristers' Roll). 
 
 "The Books containing the proceedings of this Society are still extant and are 
 safely kept at Osgoode Hall. 
 
 There had been a "Junior Advocates Society" which, April 2, 1822, resolved Itself 
 into the "Advocate Society" composed of Members of the Law Society only, each 
 paying every Term 3s, 9d (75(!), increased later to 5s. In discussing questions the 
 Rules of the House of Commons were to be observed, all students at Law might at- 
 tend below the Bar without Introduction ; every member of the Society might "ex- 
 press his sentiments freely. The elected Prothonotary was required every term to 
 inspect the Rule Book of the King's Bench and enter every new Rule in the Rule 
 Book of the Society. The Society had a Great Seal and a Keeper thereof. 
 
 The first meeting was in April 2, 1821 at which several students attended, soma 
 of whom afterwards became very well known at the Bar. The last meeting re- 
 corded was June 20, 1826. u . 
 
 Prom the first, the Society was often forced to adjourn Its meetings for want of 
 a quorum. I have not found any meeting at which more than nine members were 
 
 pppopn t" 
 
 It met until February 1822 in the office of the Solicitor General Henry John 
 Boulton, son of Mr. Justice Boulton, afterwards Chief Justice of Newfoundland ; and 
 afterwards the meetings were held in the York Court House. 
 
 The qualification that to become a member the applicant must be a member of 
 the Law Society was occasionally relaxed in favour of an Articled Clerk who had not 
 vet been able to pass the preliminary examinations before the Benchers of the Law 
 Society While it has been said more than once that the Society was composed of 
 Barristers and Students-at-Law I find that only one Barrister was admitted. 
 
 It appears from the Minutes that the Students at Law at Kingston formed a 
 similar Society in 1822, and also that there were members of the Society itself re- 
 siding in many parts of the Province, e. g. Kingston, Port Hope, Hallowell (Plcton). 
 It Beems to have gone to pieces when Robert Baldwin was called to the Bar.
 
 45 
 
 Sallust or Cicero De Officiis as well as his orations • * • 
 and it is also expected that the student will also show the 
 Society that he has had some reasonable proportion of 
 mathematical instruction." This rule was never approved by 
 the judges and never acted upon; it was formally placed in 
 abeyance January 6, 1827. From the written minutes of the 
 Advocate Society already mentioned, it appears that it was 
 by no means an uncommon practice for a student to article 
 himself before he was able to pass the examination ; if he was 
 able to pass the examination within two years of entering 
 articles he did not lose time as an attorney, as it was neces- 
 sary to be five years under articles but only three years on the 
 books of the Society, to be admitted attorney. Even the 
 necessity of being three years on the books was taken away, 
 as we shall see, in 1822. 
 
 No supervision was had by the Law Society over the educa- 
 tion of the student. If a student at law, he attended the 
 chambers of some barrister; if an articled clerk he served in 
 the office of an attorney, his master. At the end of five years 
 the budding Barrister produced to the Law Society a certifi- 
 cate of the Barrister in whose chambers he had studied that 
 he had so studied for five years, and was called to the Bar by 
 the Society, receiving the degree of Barrister-at-Law. With 
 the mere Articled Clerk the Law Society had nothing further 
 to do than admit him on its books, thereby making him a 
 member of the Society, and to certify at the proper time that 
 he had been on its books for three years. The Articled Clerk 
 appeared before the Court of King's Bench, produced an 
 affidavit by himself of service and a certificate from his 
 master, and was admitted by the Court as an Attorney-at-Law. 
 The Barrister continued to pay to the funds of the Law 
 Society, the Attorney did not. 
 
 Then came the Act of 1822, 2 Geo. 4, c. 5 (IT. C.) which by 
 section 3 rendered it unnecessary for any Articled Clerk to be 
 entered on the books of the Law Society; so that even the 
 slight control over Attorneys which the Society had by reason 
 of its preliminary examinations ceased. Members of the Law 
 Society thereafter were Barristers and Students-at-Law only.
 
 46 
 
 In 1828 (Hilary Term, 8 Geo. 4, c. 1), a rule was passed that 
 all students to be thereafter entered on the books of the 
 Society should keep four terms at York (Toronto) during 
 their five years entry 13 . At this time the Benchers were con- 
 sidering a scheme for the erection of a building for their meet- 
 ings. Theretofore they had met in various places, Wilson's 
 Hotel, the Treasurer's Office, the Parliamentary Library, the 
 Court House, etc. In 1820 (Michaelmas Term), 1 Geo. 4, they 
 decided to expend £500 (=$2,000) in "erecting a building for 
 their use to be called 'Osgoode Hall' 14 . They already had a 
 plot of land, but were not satisfied with it, and were negotiat- 
 ing for another site. May, 1828, they bought the present site 
 from the Attorney General, John B. Robinson, for £1,000 
 (=$4,000), and proceeded, the next year, to erect what is now 
 the East Wing of Osgoode Hall, having determined to spend 
 about £3,000 (=$12,000) for that purpose. 
 
 The Hall was to contain not only a convocation room, etc. 
 for the Benchers, but also rooms for the Court of King's 
 Bench and bed rooms, dining room, etc. for Barristers and 
 Students-at-Law. Students were expected to keep their terms 
 in the hall about to be built. It was finished in 1832. The 
 first meeting of the Benchers in it was held Thursday, Feb- 
 
 13 This rule was In great measure due to Dr. William Warren Baldwin for that 
 and several other years. He was an Irishman from near Cork, and had graduated in 
 medicine from Edinburgh University. He practised for a time in his native land but 
 toward the end of the 18th century emigrated with his father to Upper Canada in 
 consequence of the troublous times of the Rebellion of 1798. He settled in Durban coun- 
 try (near what is now Bowmansville), and for a short time practiced medicine there. 
 He then came to Toronto and unsuccessfully tried school teaching. He received a 
 license to pratise law in 1803 from the Hon. Peter Hunter, the Lieut-Governor, under the 
 Act of that year, and was called to the Bar Easter Term 43 Geo. 3. He became a 
 very active practitioner, Bencher in 1807 and Treasurer 1811-1814 ; 1824-1828. Ha 
 was the father of the well-known statesman, Robert Baldwin, It was in great 
 measure due to his efforts that Osgoode Hail was built. 
 
 "Called after William Osgoode the first Chief Justice of Upper Canada. One 
 historian make him an illegitimate son of George III, and certainly he was persona 
 grata with, that King. After being Chief Justice of this Province 1792-1794, he 
 became Chief Justice of Lower Canada 1794-1801. He then returned to England 
 where he died in 1824, aged 70. He left no mark on our jurisprudence. 
 
 This building, erected under the eye of Dr. William Warren Baldwin, was what 
 is now the East Wing, "a plain matter-of-fact white brick building two and a half 
 6tories high." The west wing of similar character was begun in 1844 and finished In 
 1846, and at the same time the two buildings were connected by a building sur- 
 mounted by a dome. In 1857-60 the whole was renovated, the wings faced with cut 
 stone, the central building replaced by another faced in the same way but without a 
 dome. The central building accommodated the Library and the Courts of Queen'i 
 Bench and Common Pleas ; the West Wing the Court of Chancery. Part of the East 
 Wing still remains the property of the Law Society, the Law School being built to 
 the rear. The remainder of the building is now the property of the province by deed! 
 of July 1, 1874 and November 26, 1885. 
 
 The East Wing was somewhat changed interiorly about 20 years ago, and 
 the Government of the Province has within the last few years made some addi- 
 tions and changes in the way of Court Rooms, Judges' Chambers, etc. 
 
 Those acquainted with modern Toronto may be interested to know that Osgoode 
 Hall was beyond the then eiisting limits of the Town of York.
 
 47 
 
 ruary 6th of that year (Hilary Term, 2 Wm. 4), and all meet- 
 ings since that time have been held there. 
 
 A standing committee called "The Committee of (Economy" 
 was formed February, 1833 (Hilary Term, 3 Wm. 4), and 
 charged with "the government, management, and control of 
 the ceconomical household and domestic arrangements of 
 Osgoode Hall," and their regulations are still extant showing 
 suitable arrangements made for the accommodation with 
 rooms, bed and board (including wine for the Barristers only). 
 The hall was much used by Barristers from out of town dur- 
 ing term time when they came up on motions before the Court, 
 and more by students. 
 
 In the meantime, July 2, 1831 (Trinity term, 1 and 2 Wm. 
 2), Convocation took away the necessity of a certificate from 
 his master of the fitness of the candidate and for the first time 
 an examination was ordered of all applying for admission to 
 the books of the Society, which was to be "upon full and strict 
 examination in open convocation by the Benchers present" as 
 to "habits, character and education." The questions on the 
 subjects prescribed in 1820 were put through the Treasurer 
 or such of the Benchers as might be appointed. A candidate 
 for call to the bar was examined in like manner. At the same 
 time a somewhat curious provision was made that all mem- 
 bers of the Society who had not taken a degree in it, (i. e., all 
 Students-at-Law), should be formed into classes under the 
 Presidency of a Barrister for the reading of essays, disputa- 
 tion of points of law either in the shape of cases or of ques- 
 tions, discussion of questions of general, constitutional and 
 international law, stated examinations on standard authors, 
 etc., etc. Each class was to meet at least eight times per year, 
 and a report of the meetings was to be sent to the Treasurer 
 of the Law Society. This made a kind of Students' Society 
 and was perhaps intended to fill the place of the Advocate 
 Society now defunct. 
 
 In June, 1832 (Trinity Term, 2 and 3 Wm. 4), a class to be 
 called "The Trinity Class of Students of the Law Society of 
 Upper Canada, "was formed to meet at Osgoode Hall with 
 much the same objects in view." 
 
 In November of the same year (Michaelmas Term, 3 Wm.
 
 48 
 
 4), the students on their examination for admission were 
 divided into three classes, Junior Class, Senior Class and 
 Optimes. The Junior Class to be examined in the English 
 and Latin languages, in mathematics and geography or his- 
 tory; the senior class in the English and Latin languages, 
 geometry, algebra, moral philosophy, or the Greek language, 
 astronomy and history ; the optimes in the English, Latin and 
 Greek languages, in goemetry, algebra, moral philosophy, 
 metaphysics, rhetoric and the Belles Lettres, geography, 
 astronomy and history. No advantage was derived from the 
 higher standing except that the grade was stated in the certi- 
 ficate of admission granted to the successful student. 
 
 The examination for call was "similar to that passed on 
 admission and moreover * * * in the principles of the 
 Law of England, in the science of special pleading, the law 
 of evidence, the law relating to trials at Nisi Prius and the 
 practice of the courts." 
 
 All this was of consequence in the case of Barristers, but 
 Attorneys continued for some time to be admitted as before. 
 
 As has been mentioned, the section of the Act of 1797 in 
 which three years on the books of the Society were required, 
 was repealed in 1822 by 2 Geo. 4, c. 5, s. 3, so that thereafter 
 the Law Society had no control over Articled Clerks as such. 
 Of course by far the greater number of Articled Clerks were 
 also Students-at-Law, and the Society had control over them 
 in that capacity; but no examination could be prescribed for 
 admission as attorney; that was for the Courts — and tbe 
 Courts prescribed none. 
 
 While the Law Society made no arrangements for the 
 education of students, it should be mentioned that the scheme 
 for a Provincial University submitted to the Governor in 1826 
 provided for a Professor of Law and a course in Civil and 
 Public Law. King's College was opened in 1843, and had on 
 its staff a Professor of Law. In 1850 the college became the 
 University of Toronto, and the lectures in law continued till 
 1853, when the chair was abolished 15 . The other universities 
 
 1E Tbe first Professor of Law was William Hume Blake, B. A. (T. C. D.) afterwards 
 the Chancellor of Upper Canada, the father of the Hons. Edward and S. H. Blake. Dur- 
 ing his illness, his place was filled by Mr. (afterwards Chief Justice) Draper, and Mr. 
 (afterwards Vice-Chancellor) Esten. On Blake resigning in 1848, he was succeeded 
 by Skeffington O'Connor LL. D. (T. C D.) who was afterwards (in 1803.) a Justice of 
 the Queen's Bench.
 
 49 
 
 had aud have Faculties of Law, but, as iu the present system 
 iu the University of Toronto the lectures are of an academic 
 nature, Constitutional Law, Federal Law, Roman Law and 
 the like. 
 
 Such lectures were of little use to teach a lawyer his busi- 
 ness and the want of any safeguard against a licensed prac- 
 titioner being ignorant of his profession was a matter of com- 
 mon concern. As a legal writer says a little later (1855), 1 
 Can. L. J., 0. S., at p. 163. 
 
 "Existing laws afford no guarantee of fitness. A young 
 man whose only qualification for entering the study of the 
 law is ability to read and write, may be ai'ticled to an Attorney, 
 spend five years copying and serving papers or idly kicking 
 his heels against the office desk, or in doing the dirty work of 
 a disreputable practitioner. At the end of that time, armed 
 with a certificate of service, he claims to be sworn in as an 
 attorney of Her Majesty's Court, and is sworn in accordingly. 
 He may know nothing whatever of professional duties, may in 
 fact be grossly illiterate and deficient in every requirement 
 that would enable him to act with safety and advantage for 
 a client; and yet the law entitles him, simply on proof of 
 service under articles, to the certificate enabling the holder to 
 undertake the most important duties of an Attorney." 
 
 An editorial in the following year, 1856, 2 Can. L. J., 0. S., 
 at p. 50, after pointing out the precaution taken to secure a 
 learned Bar by an examination, preliminary and final, pro- 
 ceeds: "The Attorney is subject to no examination what- 
 ever, preliminary or final. The Barrister must have proved 
 his fitness, the fitness of the attorney is presumed." 
 
 The Legislature at length gave the Law Society jurisdiction 
 over Attorneys as well as Barristers. In 1857, the Act 20 Vic. 
 c. 63. (Can.) required the Law Society, before any person 
 should be admitted as an attorney or Solicitor (the Court of 
 Chancery had been instituted in 1837 and reorganized in 1849, 
 and practitioners of that Court corresponding to Attorneys in 
 the Common Law Courts were styled "Solicitors" — prac- 
 tically all Attorneys were Solicitors and vice versa), "to ex- 
 amine and enquire by such ways and means as they should 
 think proper touching the fitness and capacity of such person
 
 50 
 
 to act as an Attorney or Solicitor;" and then and not otherwise 
 the Judges might, on production of the Law Society's Certifi- 
 cate of fitness, admit the candidate as an Attorney and Solic- 
 itor ; and this still is the law. 
 
 No Court can hear a Barrister who has not been called by 
 the Society. No Court can admit a Solicitor without the certi- 
 ficate of the Society. The Society is the sole judge of the 
 fitness and capacity of either, and the legal profession is 
 master in its own house. 
 
 The Statute of 1857 required Articles of Clerkship to be 
 filed in the office of the Clerk of the Crown and Pleas within 
 three months of their execution; this prevented post-dating 
 and fraud. Every Articled Clerk was required to attend the 
 sittings of the Courts at Osgoode Hall during at least two 
 terms under rules to be laid down by the Law Society 16 . 
 
 In August, 1859 (Trinity Term, 23 Vic), the rules were 
 recast. Students-at-Law on tbeir admission were classed: 
 1 — University Class; 2 — Senior Class and 3 — Junior Class. 
 The first class were graduates of a British University and 
 were examined on one or more of the following books: 
 Homer's Iliad, Book 1; Lucian, Charon, Life or Dream of 
 Lucian and Timon; Horace, Odes; Mathematics, Euclid, Bb. 
 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6, or Legendre's Geometrie, Bb. 1, 2, 3 and 4, 
 Hind's Algebra; Metaphysics, Walker's or Whately's Logic, 
 and Locke on the Human Understanding; Herschell's 
 Astronomy; Ancient and Modern History. For the Senior 
 Class the books and subjects named for the University Class. 
 For the Junior Class, Horace, Odes, Bb. 1 and 3 ; Mathematics, 
 Euclid, Bb. 1, 2 and 3, or Legendre's Groemetrie by Davies, 
 Bb. 1, and 3, with problems. 
 
 An applicant who, having his degree, passed the examina- 
 tion for the University Class could be called in three years 
 instead of five. If he failed, unless rejected in toto, he 
 dropped into the Junior Class as was the case with an appli- 
 cant for the senior class. There was no other than sentimental 
 advantage in passing for the senior rather than the junior 
 
 '"This legislation, much needed and very valuable, was due in great measure to 
 Hon Robert Baldwin, Treasurer, 1847 and 1S50-1858.
 
 51 
 
 class ; the time was not shortened for a member of the senior 
 class 17 . 
 
 Education was now provided for all those proposing to 
 become Barristers. Every Student-at-Law was obliged to 
 attend for four terms all the lectures given by the lecturers of 
 the Society, two in number, in Law and Equity respectively 18 , 
 who were also examiners for call. 
 
 On the examination for call, there were two classes, "Call" 
 simply, and "Call with Honors." The former was examined 
 on Blackstone's Commentaries, Bk. 1, Addison on Contracts, 
 Smith's Mercantile Law, Williams on Real Property, Story's 
 Equity Jurisprudence, Stephen on Pleading, Taylor on Evi- 
 dence, Byles on Bills, Public Statutes relating to Upper 
 Canada, Pleadings and other books and subjects as the 
 Benchers or Examiners might prescribe 19 . 
 
 By this time the use of Osgoode Hall as a boarding house 
 had come to an end, but still Articled Clerks were obliged 
 by Statute to keep two terms. They did not take the lectures 
 as Articled Clerks, but as Students-at-Law if they were such, 
 just as Students-at-Law as such were no longer required to 
 keep terms as such, but if Articled Clerks they must keep two 
 terms as Articled Clerks. The Student-at-Law passed a 
 preliminary examination, the Articled Clerk did not. 
 In the first Parliament of the Province of Ontario 20 , by 
 Statute (1868), 31 Vic. 23, it was provided that an Attorney 
 or Solicitor must during the year next but two before his final 
 examination pass an examination to the satisfaction of the 
 
 17 Applicants were examined in the presence of a standing committee of the 
 Benchers, but by the "Examiner for Matriculation." Mr. Hugh N. Gwynne, B. A. (T. 
 C. D. ) was appointed to this office ; he had been from 1842 Secretary and Librarian. 
 
 "There had since 1855 been temporary lecturers appointed, but in March 1S58 
 S. H. Strong (afterwards Hon. Sir. Henry Strong. Chief Justice of Canada) was per- 
 manently appointed Lecturer in Equity, and J. T. Anderson, Esq., in Law. See 4, 
 Canada Law Journal O. S. 60. Strong was one of the ablest equity lawyers Canada 
 ever produced. On the permanent establishment of the Osgoode Hall Law School, it 
 was hoped for some time that he would become its first principal, but he finally de- 
 clined the offer. 
 
 '"The Examinations for admission was conducted orally by the "Examiner for 
 Call" in the presence of a Committee of the Benchers. Those for Call and Certifi- 
 e:it<- were ursi m writing under the supervision of the "Examiners for Call" and if 
 50% were taken by the Candidate he then went up for an oral examination by the 
 Benchers in Convocation : if 50% were not taken, the Candidate failed. 
 
 The examinations were fairly stiff. Examples may be scon in (1860), 6 Can. L. J. 
 O. S. 31, 78. Often a large percentage of those examined were refused certificates. 
 At one examination as many as 14 out of 22 candidates, nearly 65%, failed. 
 
 "•wnat had been for many years the Province of Upper Canada became the Prov- 
 ince of Ontario July 1, 1867, by the British American Art.
 
 52 
 
 Law Society and another to its satisfaction not less than one 
 year thereafter. 
 
 I do not stop to detail what was done under this Act as it 
 merges into that next to be mentioned. 
 
 The state of affairs was improved somewhat, but not suffi- 
 ciently. In 1872 the Law Society's petition to the Legislature 
 to enable them to extend the advantages of legal education was 
 acceded to, and a new Act passed, 35 Vic. c. 6. That enabled 
 the Society to require that all Clerks thereafter to be articled 
 should pass a preliminary examination, and that their term 
 of service under their articles should not run until they had 
 passed this examination. The Benchers also were empowered 
 to make rules for the improvement of legal education, appoint 
 readers and lecturers, require the attendance of Articled 
 Clerks and Students-at-Law at reading and lectures and an 
 examination thereon as a prequisite to call to the bar or 
 admission as an attorney, etc. 21 
 
 The Benchers accordingly, June 7, 1872, laid down a curri- 
 culum for the preliminary examination of the Articled Clerks ; 
 Caesar's Commentaries, Bb. 5 and 6; Arithmetic; Euclid Bb. 
 1, 2 and 3 ; Outlines of Modern Geography ; History of Eng- 
 land (W. Douglas-Hamilton) ; English Grammar and Com- 
 position; Elements of Bookkeeping. The Students-at-Law 
 passed an examination on Horace, Odes Bk. 3; Virgil's 
 Aeneid, Bk. 6; Caesar's Commentaries, Bb. 5 and 6, Cicero, 
 Pro Milone ; Mathematics, Arithmetic, Euclid Bb. 1, 2 and 3, 
 Algebra to end of Quadratic Equations; English History (W. 
 Douglas-Hamilton) ; Outlines of Modern Geography, English 
 Grammar and Composition. It will be seen that the curricu- 
 la have much in common, Caesar, Arithmetic, Euclid, Geogra- 
 phy, History of England, English Grammar and Composi- 
 tion. The Student-at-Law took also Horace, Virgil, Cicero, 
 
 ^This Act was promoted by the Han (afterwards Sir) Oliver Mowat, the Prime 
 Minister, who had been a Vice Chancellor and took a great interest in the profession ; 
 but the matter had received long and careful consideration by the Benchers, culmin- 
 ating in a Report by the Committee on Legal Education, December 8. 1871 (Michael- 
 mas Term. 35 Vic). The Chairman of this Committee was Thomas Moss, afterwards 
 Chief Justice of Ontario ; and the Report recommended an application to Parliament. 
 The Act of 1S6S was generally known as Blake's Act from its author Hon. Edward 
 Blake. Prime Minister of Ontario. Member of the House of Commons of Canada and 
 afterwards Member of the Imperial House of Commons. He was long a Bencher 
 and for some years Treasurer of the Law Society.
 
 53 
 
 Algebra; the Articled Clerk, bookkeeping 22 . There was, 
 however, a rule that no one admitted as a student at law need 
 pass a preliminary examination as an Articled Clerk. Grad- 
 uates in Arts of a British University were not subjected to 
 any examination, and there was no longer to be any division 
 into Senior and Junior classes. 
 
 A Law School was established with four lecturers: 1 — 
 General Jurisprudence, 2 — Real Property, 3 — Commercial and 
 Criminal Law and 4 — Equity; but attendance on the lectures 
 was made voluntary. There was no building, the lectures 
 were given at Osgoode Hall and were fairly well attended. 
 
 Every Student-at-Law before his final examination for Call 
 was required to pass two intermediate examinations, the first 
 in his third year, the second in his fourth. These corre- 
 sponded to the two examinations prescribed for Articled 
 Clerks by the Statute of 1868. The curriculum prescribed for 
 each was the same, namely, for the first Intermediate, Wil- 
 liams' Real Property, Smith's Manual of Equity, Smith's 
 Manual of Common Law, Act respecting the Court of Chan- 
 cery, Consolidated Statutes of Upper Canada, chapters 12, 
 42 and 44. For the second Intermediate, Leith's Blackstone 23 ; 
 Greenwood on Conveyancing (Chapters on Agreements, Sales, 
 Purchases, Leases, Mortgages, Wills), Snell's Treatise on 
 Equity, Broom's Common Law, Consolidated Statutes of 
 Upper Canada, c. 8, Statute of Canada, 29 Vic. c. 28 24 , Insol- 
 vent Act. Pour scholarships of considerable value were estab- 
 lished, one for students under one year's standing, one for 
 for those under two, one for those under three and one for 
 those under four. The curricula were for the first, Stephen's 
 Blackstone, vol. 1; Stephen on Pleading, Williams on Per- 
 
 ^These examinations were conducted by the "Examiner for Matriculation" Mr. 
 Gwynne, before a Committee of Benchers appointed for that purpose and were partly 
 ore tenua. Papers were prepared and printed in (1) Latin, (2) Mathematics, (3) His- 
 tory, Geography, English Grammar and Composition. If the candidate did not pass 
 a satisfactory written examination he could not offer himself for the oral. All 
 distinction of Senior and Junior Class was abolished. 
 
 -^This was an edition of that part of Blackstone's Commentaries which relates to 
 Real Property. The Editor, Mr. Alexander Leith, Q. C. was a very distinguished 
 Real Property lawyer in Toronto, and in this work he gave the law as modified by 
 our legislation so as to adapt Blackstone to the circumstances of this Province; 
 otherwise of course Blackstone would be very misleading. It has always been the 
 policy of the Law Society to prescribe Ontario books where possible. 
 
 2, That is, the Statutory law of Property and Trusts In Upper Canada. Before the 
 British America Act of 18G7, the two Canadas had been for about a quarter of a cen- 
 tury united In one Province of Canada.
 
 54 
 
 sonal Property, Griffith's Institutes of Equity, Consol. Stat. 
 U. C. cc. 12, 43. For the second, Williams on Real Property, 
 Best on Evidence, Smith on Contracts, Snell's Treatise on 
 Equity, the Registry Act 25 . For the third, Real Property, 
 Statutes relating to Ontario, Stephen's Biackstone, Book V, 
 Byles on Bills, Broom's Legal Maxims, Story's Equity Juris- 
 prudence, Fisher on Mortgages, vols. 1 and 2, chapters 10, 11 
 and 12. For the fourth, Smith's Real and Personal Property, 
 Russell on Crimes, Common Law Pleading and Practice, 
 Benjamin on Sales, Dart on Vendors and Purchasers, Lewis's 
 Equity Pleading, Equity Pleading and Practice of this Prov- 
 ince. 
 
 The Articled Clerk bad a final Examination on Leith's 
 Biackstone 23 , Watkins on Conveyancing, Ninth Edition, 
 Smith's Mercantile Law, Story's Equity Jurisprudence, Leake 
 on Contracts, The Statute Law, The Pleading and Practice of 
 the Courts. The Student-at-Law if he did not go in for 
 honors, Biackstone, Volume 1, Leake on Contracts, Watkins 
 on Conveyancing, Story's Equity Jurisprudence, Stephen on 
 Pleading, Lewis 's Equity Pleading, Dart on Vendor and Pur- 
 chaser, Taylor on Evidence, Byles on Bills, The Statute Law, 
 The Pleading and Practice of the Courts ; and if he desired 
 Honors, also Russell on Crimes, Broom's Legal Maxims, 
 Lindley on Partnership, Fisher on Mortgages, Benjamin on 
 Sales, Jarman on Wills, Von Savigny's Private International 
 Law (Guthrie's Edition), Maine's Ancient Law. All final 
 candidates might be and not infrequently were examined also 
 on the Intermediate subjects. 
 
 The Law School thus established began its career in October, 
 1873 26 , and very many students availed themselves of the 
 
 ^This is, the Statutory provision as to Registration of Titles to Real Estate. 
 
 2f The Staff was composed of Alexander Leith, President and Lecturer in Real 
 Property ; James Bethune, Lecturer in General Jurisprudence ; Zebuion A. Lash, Lec- 
 turer in Commercial and Common Law, and Charles Moss, Lecturer in Equity. Mr. 
 Leith was the well-known Real Estate Lawyer, editor of Biackstone, vol. 2. Mr. 
 Bethune became one of the most prominent men at the Bar, a member of the Legis- 
 lature, whose too early death was much lamented. Mr. Lash (now K. C) was 
 afterward Deputy Minister of Justice of the Dominion, but returned to active prac- 
 tice and still adorns the Bar. Mr. Moss was afterwards Chief Justice of Ontario. 
 
 In December, 1S74, Mr. Bethune resigned and was succeeded by William Mulock 
 (now Sir William Mulock, Chief Justice of the Exchequer Division). 
 
 In May, 1S76 (Trinity Term), the term of engagement for Lecturers was made 
 one, two, three and four years respectively, and they were made ineligible for re- 
 appointment. Mr. Moss was elected for one year and made President, lecturing on 
 Common and Commercial Law ; Mr. Mulock for two, lecturing on Equity : Mr. John 
 S. Ewart (now K. C.) for three years, lecturing on Real Property, and T. D. Delamere 
 (afterwards K. C, now deceased), for four years, lecturing on Criminal Law and Law 
 of Torts. After the abolition of the Law School, Mr. Ewart for some time gave a 
 weekly lecture on Chancery practice and Mr. Delamere on Common Law Practice.
 
 55 
 
 opportunities thus given for a legal education. Students who 
 would otherwise have served their term in the country were 
 attracted to Toronto. It became a matter of complaint of the 
 country practitioners that they were deprived of their clerks — 
 particularly so as the term of service was reduced by attend- 
 ance on lectures and passing the law school examinations. A 
 student could reduce his term by from six to eighteen months 
 by this means. One requires no imagination to conceive the 
 very great inducement this was to a capable and ambitious 
 student. 
 
 Finally by a vote of 8 to 4, Convocation determined, Novem- 
 ber 24, 1877, Michaelmas Term, to abolish the Law School 
 from and after the last day of the succeeding Easter Term, 
 June, 1878. 
 
 This step was the subject of much discussion in the profes- 
 sion and in the press, legal and lay. All kinds of opinion 
 were expressed as to the means, but most agreed as to the 
 propriety of some form of education being provided for. It 
 had been proposed that the Law School should be affiliated 
 with the University of Toronto, but that course had not recom- 
 mended itself to Convocation ; a law college was suggested by 
 some. In May, 1881, the formation of associations like the 
 Osgoode Legal and Literary Society throughout the Province 
 was recommended, with a sufficient number of students to 
 ensure a good attendance and of Barristers disposed to deliver 
 lectures. It was recognized that the Law Society would not 
 create or direct these societies, but could only recommend. 
 Some such were formed, but did not last long nor were they 
 very useful while tbey did last. 
 
 Petitions came in from students in large numbers; and in 
 Michaelmas Term of 1881, the Society re-established the law 
 School for a period of two years to begin December 12, 1881. 
 with four lectures the senior of whom was to be chairman, 
 attendance still to be voluntary 27 . In view of the many peti- 
 tions for the re-establishment of the school, the attendance 
 
 ^The Lecturers appointed were Thomas Hodgins, Q. C. (afterwards Master-in- 
 Ordinary of the Supreme Court of Judicature for Ontario), Chairman and Lecturer on 
 Constitutional Law, etc. Thomas D. Delamere, already mentioned, who lectured on 
 Pleading and Practice, Joseph E. McDougall (afterwards Q. C. and Judge of the 
 County Court of the County of York) and E. Douglas Armour (afterwards K C ) 
 author of several works on Keal Property.
 
 56 
 
 was very disappointing, but it was decided to try the experi- 
 ment till the end of the two-year term. 
 
 In June, 1883, the school was continued till the early Easter 
 Term, 1884 28 . A proposition to establish law schools out- 
 side of Toronto failed. In Easter Term, 1884, the school was 
 continued until the last day of Easter Term, 1886. In 1887 
 the project of establishing a teaching faculty in the University 
 of Toronto was taken up by a committee of the Benchers with 
 the Senate of the University, and an elaborate scheme was 
 drawn up. This was vigorously criticised not only in convo- 
 cation, but out of it, especially by those interested in other 
 universities 29 . The committee was reappointed with addi- 
 tional members and directed to take the question up with all 
 the universities in the Province; they did so, but in the long 
 run without success 30 . 
 
 January 4, 1889, it was decided "to continue and reorganize 
 the school and to appoint a President 31 , who should have 
 supervision and general direction of the school," not less than 
 two lecturers and two examiners — -the lecturers theretofore 
 having been also examiners. Attendance was made com- 
 pulsory for the first time. All Students-at-Law and Articled 
 Clerks were required to take the second and third years of 
 the school course. If they resided in Toronto during the last 
 three years they must attend the full three years' course. A 
 small fee was imposed, by no means enough to pay for the 
 support of the school. 
 
 Lectures had been given in Osgoode Hall, but for a long 
 
 2s The Lecturers were Messrs Delamere and Armour already named. W. A. Reeve 
 (afterwards Principal and a Q. C. ) and Alfred H. Marsh (afterwards Q. C). 
 
 -'"The scheme will be found printed at length in 24 Can. L. J. N. S. pp. 130 sqq. 
 See one criticism at pp. 151-153 of the same volume ; another pp. 182-173. 
 
 The report is printed in 24 Can. L. J. N. S. at pp. 393-397 ; another will be 
 found in 25 Can. L. J. N. S. 51. 
 
 m It had been hoped to secure Mr. Justice Strong of the Supreme Court of Canada 
 for this position, but he declined, and, July 3, 1889, W. A. Reeve, Q. 'C, was appointed 
 Principal. 
 
 The new Principal was instructed to visit the Law Schools in New York, Massa- 
 chusetts and such other places as might be thought advisable, with Messrs. E. Mar- 
 tin, Q. C, and Charles Moss, Q. C, to acquire information on the Law School sys- 
 tems in vogue. He did so, and reported. Sept. 3. 1889, to Convocation, and the 
 School was formally opened, October 7, 1889. The Lecturers were Messrs Marsh and 
 Armour; the Examiners were Mr. P. H. Drayton (afterwards Official Arbitrator) and 
 Mr. R. E. Kingsford (afterwards Police Magistrate, Toronto). 
 
 When in Easter Term, 1890, the number of lecturers was increased to four, 
 Messrs Drayton and Kingsford were appointed Lecturers and Messrs F. J. Joseph 
 and Aytoun-Finlay and Malcolm Cameron, Examiners.
 
 57 
 
 time the proposition had been under consideration to erect 
 a building especially for a Law School. Tenders had been 
 obtained as early as December, 1880, but the matter dragged. 
 It was taken up in earnest in the fall of 1889, plans were 
 obtained and building proceeded with in 1891 and was ready 
 in 1892. 
 
 The society in 1889 dropped their preliminary examination, 
 the last to be Hilary Term, 1890. Thereafter the examina- 
 tion of the University was accepted instead, and now a degree 
 of Arts or Law of a British University or Graduation Diploma 
 of the Royal Military College, the examination of a university 
 on prescribed subjects, or a matriculation certificate, a certifi- 
 cate of the further examination at the R. M. C. is sufficient, and 
 one of them is required. 
 
 I shall not trace the trifling changes which have been made 
 in the curriculum of the Law School; but here set out the 
 present 32 . 
 
 SUBJECTS OF STUDY. 
 
 m. 
 
 FIRST YEAR. 
 GENERAL JURISPRUDENCE. 
 
 Holland's Elements of Jurisprudence. 
 
 CONTRACTS. 
 
 Anson on Contracts. 
 
 REAL PROPERTY. 
 
 Williams on Real Property, except Parts III and VII. 
 The Land Titles Act. 
 
 COMMON LAW. 
 
 Odger's Common Law. 
 
 ^The present Staff is as follows : 
 
 FACULTY. 
 
 Principal : — Newman Wright Hoyles. B. A., LL. D.. K. C. 
 
 Lecturers: — John King, M. A.. K. C., John Delatre Falconhridge, M. A., LL B 
 John Shirley Dennison, K. C, Samuel Hugh Bradford, B. A.. K. C. 
 
 Demonstrators : — Christopher Charles Robinson, B. A. ; Harold William Alexander 
 Foster, LL. B. 
 
 Examiners: — Archibald Douglas Armour. M. A. Senior Examiner, Neil Douglas 
 McLean. B. A., Patrick Kerwin, George Franklin McFarlane, LL. B., John Alexander 
 Soule, LL. B.
 
 58 
 
 CONSTITUTIONAL HISTOBY AND LAW. 
 
 Bourinot's Manual of the Constitutional History of 
 Canada. Todd's Parliamentary Government in the Brit- 
 ish Colonies (second edition 1894). The following 
 portions, viz : 
 
 Chapter 2, pages 25 to 63 inclusive. 
 Chapter 3, pages 73 to 83 inclusive. 
 Chapter 4, pages 107 to 128 inclusive. 
 Chapter 5, pages 155 to 184 inclusive. 
 Chapter 6, pages 200 to 208 inclusive. 
 Chapter 7, pages 209 to 246 inclusive. 
 Chapter 8, pages 247 to 300 inclusive. 
 Chapter 9 pages 301 to 312 inclusive. 
 
 EQUITY. 
 
 Maitland's Lectures in Equity. 
 
 PBACTICE AND PROCEDURE. 
 
 Judicature Act and Eules of Practice. 
 
 STATUTE LAW. 
 
 Such Acts and parts of Acts as shall be prescribed by 
 the Principal. 
 
 SECOND YEAR. 
 CRIMINAL LAW. 
 
 The Criminal Statutes of Canada. 
 
 REAL PROPERTY. 
 
 Kerr's Student's Blackstone, Book 2. Armour's Real 
 Property. 
 
 PERSONAL PROPERTY. 
 
 Williams on Personal Property. 
 
 CONTRACTS. 
 
 Pollock on Contracts. 
 
 Rawlins on Specific Performance. 
 
 Pollock on Partnership. 
 
 TORTS. 
 
 Underbill on Torts. 
 
 EQITY. 
 
 H. A. Smith's Principals of Equity. 
 Underbill on Trusts. 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 Powell on Evidence.
 
 59 
 
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. 
 
 Lefroy's Canada's Federal System. 
 
 PRACTICE AND PEOCEDUEE. 
 
 Statutes, Rules and Orders relating to the jurisdiction, 
 pleadings, practice and procedure of the Supreme Court 
 of Canada, the Exchequer Court and the Courts of 
 Ontario. 
 
 STATUTE LAW. 
 
 Such Acts and parts of Acts as shall be prescribed by 
 the Principal. 
 
 EQUITY. 
 
 Underbill on Trusts, 1914-15, De Colyar on Guarantees. 
 Bell and Dunn on Mortgages, 1915-16, De Colyar on 
 Guarantees. 
 
 TOETS. 
 
 Pollock on Torts. 
 
 Smith on Negligence, 2nd edition. 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 Best on Evidence. 
 
 COMMEECIAL LAW. 
 
 Cbahners on Sales. 
 
 Maclaren on Bills, Notes and Cheques. 
 
 PEIVATE INTEENATIONAL LAW. 
 
 Foote's Private International Jurisprudence. 
 
 CONSTEUCTION AND OPEEATION OF STATUTES. 
 
 Hardcastle's Construction and Effects of Statutory Law. 
 
 PBACTICE AND PEOCEDUEE. 
 
 Statutes, Rules and Orders relating to the jurisdiction, 
 pleadings, practice and procedure of the Supreme Court 
 of Canada, the Exchequer Court and the Courts of 
 Ontario. 
 
 COMPANY LAW. 
 
 The Ontario Companies Act and Amendments. The 
 Companies Act, R. S. C. Chap. 79, and amendments. The 
 Winding-up Act, R. S. C. Chap. 144, and amendments. 
 Palmer's Company Law. 
 
 MUNICIPAL LAW. 
 
 The Municipal Act.
 
 60 
 
 STATUTE LAW. 
 
 Such Acts and parts of Acts as shall be prescribed by the 
 Principal. 
 
 NOTE. — In the examination of all the years, students are 
 subject to be examined upon the matter of the lectures of 
 those years respectively, as well as upon the text books 
 and other work prescribed. 
 
 Any person who desires to qualify for the practice of the 
 law as a Barrister and Solicitor in Ontario, and who does 
 not come under the rules in special cases, is required : 
 1 — To be admitted into the Society as a Student-at-Law. 
 2 — To serve a practising Solicitor as his clerk for the pre- 
 scribed period. 
 3 — To attend lectures at the Law School for three years. 
 4 — To pass the prescribed examinations. 
 5 — To pay the prescribed fees. 
 
 (If he does not wish to be admitted as a solicitor he need 
 not serve under Articles at all, but must attend a Barrister's 
 Chambers for the same time. This is in practice never done 
 now). 
 
 The time of service for a graduate is three years ; for a non- 
 graduate five; fee for admission to the Society is $51, school 
 fees per term $100, for call to the bar $100 and for admission 
 as Solicitor $60. The title "attorney" has not been in use 
 since 1881, all members of that branch of the profession are 
 now called solicitor 33 . 
 
 ra I have gone thus particularly into the history of the Law Society to show the 
 variations from time to time of public opinion and the experiments which have been 
 tried. Let me tabulate. 
 
 BARRISTERS. ATTORNEYS (OR SOLICITORS). 
 
 1792 Adoption of French Canadian System, all for five years under articles, examined 
 before the Court and called both as Advocates and Attorneys. 
 
 1797 Must be five years on Books of Must have been under Articles five years, 
 
 Law Society and the same time in Bar- and three years on Books of the So- 
 
 rister's Chambers. No examination. ciety. No examination. The five years 
 
 The five years requirement, except in requirement, except in special cases, 
 
 special cases, still continues. still continues. 
 
 1818 Examination for admission to the Society on one of Cicero's orations, etc., be- 
 fore the Benchers. 
 
 1822 Attorneys, no longer members of the Law 
 
 Society. No examination required at 
 
 1825 Examination on Latin Prose and 
 Poetical Authors, and in the Mathe- 
 matics before the Benchers. 
 
 1828 Students must keep four Terms 
 in Court. 
 
 1831 Formed classes for educative pur- 
 poses. 
 
 1832 And especially one at Osgoode 
 Hall. 
 
 1857 
 
 any time. 
 
 Must attend two terms in Court and 
 be examined and certified by the Law 
 Society.
 
 61 
 
 It will be seen that the Legislature has ultimately placed 
 in the hands of the profession not only the regulation but 
 also the education of practitioners of all kinds. This has 
 proved so beneficial that the like provisions have been ex- 
 tended to the professions of Medicine, Dentistry, Pharmacy 
 (the Medical Council indeed does not educate owing to the ex- 
 istence of our efficient established Medical Colleges). There 
 is no fear of the standard being debased ; no advantage is de- 
 rived by the profession from graduation of a large class, i. e. 
 the admission of a great number to the Bar who will be com- 
 petitors of those already practising, and any attempt to make 
 the standard too high would be restrained by a wholesome 
 regard for public opinion. It must however be said that 
 though it has twice happened in the history of the Province 
 (in 1794 and 1804), that the Legislature thought there were 
 not enough lawyers, it is hard to conceive of our community 
 (or perhaps any other) ever thinking that again. 
 
 It will be seen that we have tried all the methods of educa- 
 tion that can be suggested. We have had the student left to 
 the teaching of a master, for long the method in England. 
 We have had the students directed to band themselves to- 
 gether in Classes for mutual benefit and with lectures from 
 Barristers. We have obliged them to attend terms of Court. 
 We have tried to make satisfactory arrangements with the 
 Universities. All these have proved wholly insufficient, and 
 in the long run the lawyers of Ontario have put their hands 
 into their own pockets, erected a Law School building, en- 
 gaged and paid lecturers and examiners and have determined 
 to educate the young men to become competitors of them- 
 selves ; and this they did for a long time at an annual loss 
 of a considerable amount. That I think can fairly be called 
 altruism if it is also esprit de corps. 
 
 We should have been much better satisfied if the Universi- 
 ties or one of them had established a real and practical Fac- 
 ulty of Law with a curriculum satisfactory to us; but we 
 should always have insisted on conducting the examinations 
 for Call and Admission ourselves just as is done in Medicine,
 
 62 
 
 Dentistry, Pharmacy, etc. The reasons for this are apparent 
 and need not be specified. 
 
 We have found, too, that the same curriculum should be 
 prescribed for all lawyers whether Barristers or Solicitors, 
 just as the same curriculum is prescribed by the Medical 
 Council for all doctors whether surgeons or physicians. 
 
 The control of the Law Society over practitioners is com- 
 plete and it is exercised without flinching though judicially. 
 The accused has notice of the charge against him and is sum- 
 moned to attend the hearing of evidence. He may cross-ex- 
 amine by self or counsel, give his own or (and) other evi- 
 dence and in all respects has the right of an ordinary litigant. 
 
 Very early indeed one member was disbarred, and there 
 has never been any hesitation to exercise the wholesome jur- 
 isdiction. 
 
 We have continued the distinction of Barrister and Solici- 
 tor. Although all but a very few have from the beginning 
 been both Barrister and Solicitor that has not been univer- 
 sal 34 , moreover a few who have been admitted as solicitor 
 have ceased to take out the annual license to practise as such ; 
 about 4% are in that case, a rather smaller percentage have 
 never been called. At one time when the curriculum and pre- 
 requisites were different from the two branches of the pro- 
 fession, the omission to qualify for both was not unnatural or 
 uncommon ; but now the curriculum is exactly the same, and 
 it may be confidently expected that this will be even less com- 
 mon. The Articled Clerk serving in the office of a solicitor 
 
 "There was a time about fifty years ago when some attorneys seemed to think 
 they were entitled to act as Counsel in the County Courts and with the usual costume 
 of the Barrister: (See 2 Can. L. J. N. S. p. 253) but this was soon checked. 
 
 The Barrister is clothed in black with white linen and necktie (or bands), and a 
 black gown. If he is a King's Counsel his costume is of a peculiar cut corresponding 
 to the usual costume of a gentlemen in Queen Anne's time, his gown is also of a 
 peculiar cut and made of silk ; the Utter Barrister, i. e., one not a K. C, wears black 
 clothes of any seemly cut and a "Barrister's Gown" of stuff. 
 
 In the day when cloth bags were commonly carried — say thirty years ago — the 
 Attorney carried one of black colour as did the student ; the Barrister's was blue, the 
 Queen's (King's) Counsel's red, and the Judge's green. These are still occasionally 
 seen, and it would be as grave a breach of decorum for one to carry the bag of an- 
 other grade as for a corporal to carry a colonel's insignia or vice versa. Most, how- 
 ever, of all grades now carry a black leather bag, the "brief-bag" as it is called. 
 
 Since 1857 the branches of the profession have been gradually assimilated, and 
 the courses of study continually extended until the present time when the courses are 
 identical and reasonably difficult. 
 
 The first and second Attorneys General, being English Barristers, did not sign 
 the Attorney's Roll, and a few others from the mother-land were in the same condi- 
 tion. In the first twenty-five years of the Law Society only 3 out of 64 Attorneys 
 did not become Barristers, — less than 5%. The proportion increased after the Act of 
 1822, so that by the time the Act of 1S87 was passed, the percentage was nearly 30%. 
 This tendency was checked by the Act of 1S57. and now the percentage is negligible.
 
 63 
 
 Is at the same time attending the Chambers of the Barrister. 
 
 This apparent anomaly is only apparent and not real. 
 Just as in the sister profession of medicine practically every 
 one on this continent is educated in both medicine and sur- 
 gery, and many become not only M. D. but also C. M. ; they 
 are both physicians and surgeons and all have the same cur- 
 riculum and examination. This is not so in England. The 
 Royal College of Physicians and the Royal College of Sur- 
 geons are not the same ; just as there the Barrister is not a 
 Solicitor or the Solicitor a Barrister. 
 
 Nevertheless it is recognized on this Continent as well that 
 tlic office of the Surgeon is not the same as that of the Physi- 
 cian although the dividing line may often be uncertain. And 
 so, no matter what the name, the office of the Solicitor is not 
 the same as that of the Barrister, although the dividing line is 
 often uncertain. In Ontario many doctors devote themselves 
 mainly or wholly to surgery and do not meddle with medicine 
 although wholly qualified and licensed as Physicians and so 
 some Lawyers devote themselves mainly or wholly to "Coun- 
 sel Work" the function of the Barrister. This has been found 
 to be of very great advantage as he who devotes himself to 
 surgery acquires a skill and dexterity to which the ordinary 
 "General Practitioner" cannot attain, so he who devotes him- 
 self to conducting cases in Trial and Appellate Courts attains 
 skill and dexterity beyond that of the ordinary lawyer. This is 
 of as much advantage to the litigant as that to the patient; 
 and of as much advantage to the Solicitor whose client has 
 been taken in hand by the Counsel, as that of the general 
 practitioner whose patient has been taken in hand by the 
 Specialist. It must not be forgotten that a trial is a "major 
 operation" desiderating skill and experience at the best of 
 times and with the best of judges. 
 
 As a consequence, while practically every lawyer is licensed 
 to conduct his own cases at the triad and in appeal, in a 
 large percentage of cases one of those who are known to de- 
 vote themselves largely to Counsel work is employed on those 
 occasions. Generally the solicitor himself will take part as 
 Junior Counsel in his capacity as Barrister. There is noth-
 
 64 
 
 ing in the way of esprit de corps, custom, public opinion, etc., 
 to prevent the solicitor taking his own brief — and many do 
 so — any more than a physician is prevented from operating 
 on his own patient — and many do. 
 
 In some cases the client himself insists on counsel being 
 employed, just as some patients and their friends insist on 
 a specialist surgeon. The only objection I ever heard to this 
 custom is the fear expressed that the Counsel will steal the 
 client. The very expression of such a fear indicates an extra- 
 ordinarily low state of morals in the profession where such a 
 fear can be more than the merest illusion. Any one who 
 would steal a client would steal a sheep if it suited his purpose ; 
 and there is in our system about as little chance of the 
 one as of the other. I have never heard it so much as sug- 
 gested that any Counsel ever stole a client and I cannot think 
 that such a thing could ever take place. 
 
 The Brief is brought or sent to Counsel by the solicitor 
 himself. If the clienx brings it, he must bring either the so- 
 licitor or a letter from him. The client cannot in the first 
 instance be so much as seen without the solicitor's consent, 
 and the solicitor is always kept informed of everything that 
 is being done with or for his client. The client is sent back 
 to the solicitor; no Counsel would directly or indirectly ac- 
 cept as a client of his own, one sent to him by a solicitor. If 
 any counsel were even to come under suspicion of such im- 
 proper dealings, his practice would dwindle to the vanishing 
 point. If it were proved against him he should be suspended 
 or disbarred. 
 
 Counsel make their money by taking cases for others ; 
 prudent regard for their own pockets (if no higher reason) 
 would keep them from "filching and stealing." 
 
 No one would, if he had to frame a system for the profes- 
 sion de novo et ab origine, think of making a formal distinc- 
 tion between barrister and solicitor, but we are an essentially 
 practical people; we care nothing for logical consistency; if 
 we find an institution work reasonably well in practice we do 
 not discard it because it seems anomalous in theory. We 
 would never think of applying to the Legislature to make the
 
 G5 
 
 distinction if none existed but we find it come down to us 
 from the past as an existing institution and we find it does no 
 harm, and accordingly we retain it. 
 
 But whatever the form, there must always be in fact a 
 marked distinction in function. There must always be in 
 fact abilities, acquirements which tend to enhance proficiency 
 in one or the other capacity, and often the acquirements or 
 abilities most useful in one are not so but perhaps rather the 
 reverse in the other. On that I need not enlarge, but content 
 myself with saying that nothing but good can be the result of 
 a specialization as Counsel of a sufficient number of lawyers 
 whose talents lie in that direction, and the liberal employment 
 of these by practitioners less well qualified in that regard. 
 
 In conclusion permit me to say how glad I am to meet the 
 Society, to wish it a long, prosperous and useful career and 
 to add that I shall most gladly do all that is in my power to 
 further its objects and enhance its usefulness. 
 
 William Renwick Riddell.
 
 000 149 513 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.