-NRLF 
 

 LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 GIFT OF 
 
 .. ( ^*^k tr ^^ 
 
 Class 
 
JAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO 
 
 Report of 
 Section on Ethics 
 
 CODE OF ETHICS 
 
 Unanimously Adopted 
 
 by 
 Bar Association of San Francisco, 
 
 Friday, Octooer 14, 1910. 
 
BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO 
 
 Report of 
 Section on Ethics 
 
 CODE OF ETHICS 
 
 CHARLES S. WHEELER, 
 WARREN OLNEY JR., 
 GROVER O'CONNOR, 
 CHARLES A. SHURTLEPP, 
 A. C. FREEMAN, 
 
 Members of Section. 
 
 Published by Authority of the Association. 
 
 OF TH 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 SAN FRANCISCO 
 
 Recorder Printing and Publishing Company 
 1010 
 
BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO 
 
 Report of 
 Section on Ethics 
 
 San Francisco, California, Oct. 13, 1910. 
 
 To the President and Members of the Bar Associa- 
 tion of San Francisco. 
 
 Gentlemen: 
 
 Your Section on Legal Ethics respectfully reports 
 as follows: 
 
 As understood by your Committee, the phrase 
 "Legal Ethics" broadly embraces every phase of 
 morals and manners pertaining to the two branches 
 of the legal profession the Bench and the Bar in 
 their relation to the administration of justice. Any 
 attempt to codify all of the moral obligations of 
 the lawyer, even if susceptible of successful accom- 
 plishment, would serve no practical purpose, and 
 a Code closely defining, and demanding adherence 
 to, rules of etiquette and set forms and formalities 
 upon the part of members of the Bar in their rela- 
 tions with one another and with the Bench, would 
 bear too close an analogy to hated sumptuary leg- 
 
 205700 
 
islation to command the respectful attention of the 
 profession. 
 
 Most strictly ethical truths are recognized intuitive- 
 ly, and are sufficiently registered in the reasoning and 
 conscience of the individual, and would not be ren- 
 dered more effective by codification. 
 
 The lawyer's oath, section 282 of the Code of 
 Civil Procedure, and the code sections relating to 
 trusts and trustees, supplemented by the Golden 
 Rule and certain of the Ten Commandments are 
 sufficient, save under extraordinary conditions as a 
 tangible expression of the ethical obligations of the 
 Bar. But it appears to your Committee that occa- 
 sion has arisen for a Code of Ethics differing in es- 
 sential particulars from any that has heretofore ap- 
 peared, and which shall deal with certain phases 
 of some of the duties which the profession is mor- 
 ally obligated to perform and which seem to call 
 for emphasis at the present time. 
 
 There are live questions stirring at the moment 
 which are of vital consequence not only to the Bar 
 itself, but also to the State and the Nation in their 
 relations with the legal profession. The Code here- 
 with presented for your consideration is an effort 
 to cope with some of them. 
 
 Your Committee desires to speak plainly in ex- 
 planation of the unmincing phraseology in which it 
 has purposely clothed some of its proposed canons. 
 
 The Bar is reminded that the President of the 
 United States has declared, publicly and officially, 
 
5* * 
 
 that the administration of the criminal law is a 
 disgrace to our institutions. In this belief he seems 
 to have the concurrence of all persons save the 
 criminal element and their sympathizers. 
 
 There is a growing lack of confidence in the im- 
 partiality and integrity of the judiciary. The be- 
 lief is current that lawyers and interests deemed 
 to have been instrumental in securing the nomina- 
 tion and election to office of divers members of the 
 judiciary are peculiarly potent in matters coming 
 before the Bench, and that our judges are tram- 
 melled by political obligations and aspirations in 
 the performance of their duties. Complaint is very 
 general that our courts base their decisions rather 
 on hair-splitting technicalities than upon the real 
 merits of the causes. It is commonly charged 
 against some of our judges that they perform little 
 work, shirk trials, read little law, and are neither 
 sufficiently educated nor experienced in the law to 
 have justified their advancement to the offices they 
 hold. 
 
 The jury system has acquired the disrespect and 
 the distrust of a very large body of our citizens. 
 There is a belief in many quarters that large inter- 
 ests, corporate and other, maintain bureaus whose 
 business it is to improperly influence jurors, or 
 upon special occasions agencies are invoked for the 
 same corrupt purpose. The feeling is often heard 
 expressed that justice cannot be had from juries 
 in civil causes, notably in damage suits for per- 
 
sonal injuries against public service corporations. 
 It is charged that sometimes corrupt juries are de- 
 liberately selected; that at other times jurors are 
 corrupted during the trial, and that the admonitions 
 of the court to jurors not to discuss with third 
 persons or among themselves the cause on trial, are 
 generally and habitually disregarded. Often, where 
 no suspicion of jury-tampering appears, neverthe- 
 less the opinion is prevalent that the trial by jury, 
 once regarded as the buttress of our liberties, has 
 degenerated into a farcical battle of wit between 
 opposing counsel for the favor of the jury's verdict, 
 with very little regard for the evidence in the case 
 or the merits of the controversy. 
 
 Many hold that the statutory grounds for dis- 
 qualifying jurymen have been so far extended by 
 judicial construction, and in practice, that intelli- 
 gent and fair-minded men are rarely found eligible 
 to jury duty, and that in consequence the intelli- 
 gence of the average jury falls far below the aver- 
 age intelligence of the community; that our system 
 of instructing jurors on questions of law approaches 
 the absurd; that in every day experience jurors are 
 called upon to listen to the reading of many pages 
 of instructions, replete with legal verbiage and at- 
 tenuated distinction, which few lawyers compre- 
 hend at one reading, and which no sane person 
 believes are understood, comprehended or remem- 
 bered by the jurors, and which, though without ac- 
 tual effect upon the verdict, are nevertheless a 
 
( UNIVERSITY I 
 
 \ OF J 
 
 X44UFOR^^ 
 
 7 
 
 fruitful source of reversal, retrial, expense, and de- 
 lay. 
 
 One hears the complaint from all directions that 
 the law's delays, both in the trial courts and in the 
 appellate courts, amount practically to a denial of 
 justice; that such delays are unnecessary, and are 
 not only tolerated, but are brought about by the 
 apathy of the Bench and Bar. It is frequently 
 charged that the machinery of the law can be so 
 manipulated that, by means of wearing and dila- 
 tory tactics and expensive processes, a litigant with 
 no justice in his cause but possessed of riches can 
 effectually deprive a poor suitor of his rights, and 
 that a large number of the lawyers of this Bar 
 stand ready, for a fee, to pander to the man of 
 property in this prostitution of the law; that the 
 Bar is overrun with dishonest lawyers and un- 
 principled pettifoggers, and that those who are 
 themselves not actually dishonest nevertheless wink 
 at, or at least take no steps to prevent, crookedness 
 in others; that the Bar is too indifferent to its own 
 honor to bring about the disbarment of those who 
 have disgraced the profession; that it is too selfish 
 and inert to perform the duties morally resting 
 upon it as a body; that it is too cowardly as a body 
 to beard and call to account a judge it may know 
 to be shirking and neglecting his judicial duties, or 
 otherwise bringing his high office into disrepute; 
 that the Bar does not uphold the courts against 
 what it may know to be unjust assault and ground- 
 
less public clamor, and, generally, that in matters 
 calling for character, independence of action, moral 
 courage, and professional self-respect, it is shock- 
 ingly deficient. 
 
 The foregoing, and other current beliefs of a 
 kindred nature, however exaggerated they may be, 
 and however unjustified by actual facts and con- 
 ditions, are nevertheless seriously undermining the 
 people's respect for the law, and it will not do for 
 the Bar to close its eyes to their existence. 
 
 The Code of Ethics herewith presented does not 
 attempt to investigate or pass upon the justness of 
 the complaints enumerated above. It assumes the 
 integrity of the Bar and Bench, but while doing so 
 it recognizes the fact that these complaints exist, 
 and frames its rules with a view not only to the 
 correction of such evils if they do exist, but directs 
 them against any appearances which would justify 
 such strictures, to the end that the complaints may 
 cease, and confidence in and due respect for the 
 courts and the Bar be correspondingly restored. 
 
 The duty of maintaining its own reputation is 
 the paramount obligation which the profession 
 owes to itself. In order to rehabilitate itself in the 
 people's esteem, it must wake up and exact of itself 
 the performance of its ethical obligations. A fail- 
 ure to do so would be a confession that it is, as a 
 profession, unequal to the honorable duties which 
 a patriotic people has laid upon it. 
 
 Without organization the Bar cannot hope to 
 
9 
 
 meet the obligations which rest upon the profes- 
 sion as a whole. Every man who is fit to stay in 
 the profession is fit to be a member of his local Bar 
 Association. The reputable members of the pro- 
 fession and the whole legal body owe it to them- 
 selves to exercise proper supervision of the pro- 
 fessional conduct of the individuals making up the 
 professional body. By common consent, no man 
 should be held to be in reputable standing at the 
 Bar who is unwilling to identify himself with the 
 organized Bar. The time when apathy and neglect 
 by the individual in this regard can be further 
 tolerated has passed. Henceforth it must be made 
 an accepted canon of the profession that member- 
 ship in such an organization, and a proper atten- 
 tion to the obligations of membership, are essential 
 to professional standing. 
 
 A Code of Legal Ethics is not self-executing, and, 
 of itself, is without potency or vitality. All that it 
 can hope to do is to prick the consciences and help 
 in arousing the sensibilities of the profession. It 
 is action, and not mere sounding ethical phrases 
 or dogmas, that the situation most earnestly calls 
 for. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 CHARLES S. WHEELER, Chairman. 
 
 WARREN OLNEY, 
 
 GROVER O'CONNOR, 
 
 CHARLES A. SHURTLEFF, 
 
 A. C. FREEMAN. 
 
CODE OF LEGAL ETHICS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Bar Association of San Francisco 
 
 i. 
 
 Distinctive Character of American Legal Ethics. 
 
 The Bar Association of San Francisco calls upon 
 all licensed practitioners at the San Francisco Bar 
 to bear in mind that the profession of the law, for 
 more than two thousand years, has been recognized 
 as essential to the social concept which is the basis 
 of American civilization; that the ideals of the pro- 
 fession call not only for ability, learning, humanity, 
 and probity, but for a high-minded and unselfish 
 obedience to the ethical truth that the lawyer, as an 
 officer of the Court, is obligated to aid in, and not 
 to hamper or thwart, the administration of justice. 
 
 They are also called upon to remember that their 
 profession is incorporated into, and dignified by, the 
 organic acts of the State and the Nation; that the 
 Bar is charged with the high duty of supplying from 
 its limited ranks the Judicial Department of govern- 
 ment, the supreme importance of which department is 
 emphasized in the circumstance that the people have 
 10 
 
11 
 
 delegated to it the power to adjudge null and void 
 the acts of the two remaining departments. 
 
 The Bar is admonished that an incompetent, cow- 
 ardly, or dishonest judiciary would, if persisted in, 
 lead to the overthrow of American institutions; and 
 that a competent, courageous and honest judiciary 
 cannot be looked for if the Bar itself is incompetent, 
 cowardly, dishonest, or careless of the obligations 
 resting upon it as a collective body. 
 
 The profession should also bear in mind that the 
 lawyer, in addition to his distinct functions in 
 reference to the judicial branch of the government, 
 has always been given much prominence in the legis- 
 lative and executive departments; that in the legis- 
 lative department members of his profession have 
 usually, if not invariably, outnumbered the legislators 
 elected from any other single walk in life, while the 
 chief executives of the State and the Nation have, in 
 most instances, been members of the Bar. 
 
 The foregoing considerations, to which many of a 
 kindred nature might be added, emphasize the vital 
 nature of the relation of the Bar to American institu- 
 tions, and point to the supreme truth that American 
 patriotism is the keystone of American Legal Ethics. 
 
 II. 
 
 Lawyers' Obligations to the Professional Body. 
 
 To the end that the duties which rest upon the Bar 
 as a professional body may be performed, each lawyer 
 
12 
 
 is in honor obligated to devote to the common cause 
 a fair proportion of his time and labor. 
 
 III. 
 
 Organized Effort Essential. 
 
 Since it is obvious that the work of the Bar cannot 
 be effectually accomplished without organized effort, 
 it follows that a local Bar Association should em- 
 brace in its membership each and every reputable 
 member of the Bar. The refusal of a member of the 
 Bar so to identify himself with the body of his pro- 
 fession at his earliest opportunity is a flagrant dis- 
 regard of professional duty. 
 
 Each member of the Bar is morally bound to per- 
 form fairly and thoroughly the work assigned to him 
 by the organized Bar. 
 
 Duties of an inquisitorial or disciplinary character 
 demand not only fairness and impartiality, but the 
 highest degree of moral courage, unselfishness and 
 backbone. Boards and committees called upon to dis- 
 charge such duties are, in an important sense, the 
 custodians of the reputation and dignity of the Bar. 
 Shirking of duty on such committees is reprehensible 
 and unprofessional in a high degree. 
 
 IV. 
 
 Duty to Maintain High Standard in Personnel of 
 
 Bench and Bar. 
 
 It is the duty of the united Bar to exert its influ- 
 ence and efforts to the end that those only who are 
 
18 
 
 honest, intelligent, and adequately prepared shall be 
 admitted to the Bar; that those only who maintain 
 their integrity of character shall be permitted to 
 remain there; that those only who are in every way 
 fitted shall be elevated to the Bench, and that those 
 only whose honesty, industry, affiliations, associations, 
 and habits continue to maintain the people's faith 
 in and respect for the law shall be permitted to re- 
 main on the Bench. 
 
 V. 
 
 Non-Partisanship in Regard to the Bench. 
 
 It is the duty of the Bar to endeavor to prevent 
 political considerations from outweighing judicial fit- 
 ness in the selection of judges. It should protest earn- 
 estly and actively against the appointment or election 
 of those who are unsuitable for the Bench. The 
 united Bar should likewise strive for retention in 
 office of competent judges, irrespective of their party 
 affiliations, and should exert its influence for the re- 
 moval of the judiciary from the domain of partisan 
 politics. 
 
 VI. 
 
 Attitude of the Bar Toward the Bench. 
 
 The lawyer must bear in mind that his duty to 
 maintain toward the courts a respectful attitude does 
 not spring from his personal regard for the incumbent 
 of the judicial office, but from the fact that it is of 
 
-.14 
 
 supreme importance that the dignity of the office shall 
 be maintained. Bad opinion of the incumbent, how- 
 ever well-founded, cannot excuse a failure to exhibit 
 the respect due to the judicial office. 
 
 Judges are entitled to receive the support of the 
 Bar as a professional body against unjust criticism 
 and clamor. 
 
 Where there is a proper ground for serious com- 
 plaint against a judicial officer, it is the right and 
 duty of the lawyer to submit his grievance to the 
 proper authorities. In such cases, but not otherwise, 
 such charges should be encouraged, and the person 
 making them should be upheld and protected by his 
 professional brethren. 
 
 Lawyers are admonished to bear in mind that one 
 side or the other must prevail in each of the several 
 stages of a court proceeding, and that it is highly 
 unprofessional to display temper either in court or 
 out because of an adverse ruling or decision. 
 
 It is reprehensible and highly unprofessional for a 
 lawyer to communicate, or argue privately, with a 
 judge as to the merits of a pending cause, and he 
 deserves rebuke and denunciation for any device or 
 attempt to gain from a judge special consideration or 
 personal privilege or favor. 
 
 VII. 
 
 Relations of Bench and Bar. 
 
 Mutual respect, induced by high-minded independ- 
 ence in the discharge of judicial and professional 
 
15 
 
 duty, is a proper foundation for cordial personal and 
 official relations between Bench and Bar. 
 
 A judge's personal and political friends, who prac- 
 tice before him, owe it to him, to the Bar, and to the 
 public to be scrupulously careful to avoid any ap- 
 pearance, act, or conduct susceptible of misconstruc- 
 tion. 
 
 VIII. 
 
 Profession Responsible for the Progress and Adequacy 
 of the Law. 
 
 Law is a progressive science, and it is the duty of 
 the Bar to do its utmost to keep it abreast of the 
 needs of the times. To that end the Bar should exert 
 itself to bring about the abolition of any rules of 
 law or practice, however firmly grounded in prece- 
 dent, that may appear to have become unsuited to 
 present conditions. Particularly should the Bar 
 strive for the abolition of any statutory or judicial 
 doctrine not consonant with justice and equity. 
 
 IX. 
 
 Profession Responsible for the Law's Delays. 
 
 The Bar admits its full responsibility for such of 
 the law's delays as are not inherently necessary under 
 our system of government. This Bar recognizes that 
 it is an immediate and continuing duty on the part 
 of the profession, on the Bench and at the Bar, to 
 remedy the present tardy methods of conducting legal 
 
16 
 
 controveries. To that end the members of the Bar 
 are admonished that code provisions and rules of 
 court regulating pleadings, practice, and procedure 
 are intended to facilitate and speed the administra- 
 tion of justice. Those in existence are recognized by 
 the Bar as adaptable to that purpose if their spirit 
 is insisted upon and obeyed by both Bench and Bar. 
 
 To the same end, the Association declares it to be 
 not professional for a lawyer to take advantage of 
 any imperfections in the machinery of the law, with 
 the intent thereby to retard, delay, or restrict the 
 speedy trial and conclusion of civil and criminal ac- 
 tions and proceedings, or the hearing of any demurrer, 
 motion, or matter therein requiring a hearing. 
 
 It is not professional to interpose demurrers for the 
 purpose of securing delay, nor to carp at trivial de- 
 fects in a pleading not going to the merits; nor to 
 move to strike out parts of a pleading where no use- 
 ful purpose will be subserved thereby; nor to obtain 
 by stipulation or by order more time to plead than 
 is reasonably and fairly necessary; nor to neglect to 
 demand a jury trial until on or near the day of 
 trial; nor ever to demand a jury trial where the pur- 
 pose of the demand is to delay the cause; nor to move 
 or request a court to grant a continuance of a cause 
 on statutory grounds without making a strictly legal 
 showing, or upon any other grounds without making 
 or causing to be made to the court and opposing 
 counsel a full, truthful, and unexaggerated statement 
 of the reason therefor; nor to refrain from notifying 
 the court and opposing counsel, as far in advance 
 
17 - 
 
 of the time set for trial as the circumstances of the 
 case will admit, of an intent to move for a continu- 
 ance; nor to move for a change of venue or to make 
 any other motion in an action or proceeding, merely 
 to vex, harass, or annoy the opposite party, or to 
 put him to needless expense, nor to make use of the 
 delays necessary or possible in the law for the pur- 
 pose of wearing out an antagonist or forcing him to 
 a compromise. 
 
 It is the duly of the Bench and Bar to be punctual 
 in attendance upon court. 
 
 It is the lawyer's duty, in the trial of causes, to 
 expedite the work of the court by admitting the truth 
 of all matters which he knows to be true, and not 
 to consume its time by requiring proof, in the hope 
 of discovering and obtaining advantage from technical 
 defects in an opponent's preparation or procedure. 
 
 The lawyer is ethically obligated, not only to his 
 clients, but also to the Bar, to take upon himself 
 no more business than he can properly and speedily 
 dispatch. While reasonable courtesies in the matter 
 of continuances are essential in the experience of 
 every lawyer, it is inethical to expect, or to seek to 
 obtain, postponements or delays in the trial of causes 
 which are either unreasonable in number or dura- 
 tion, or which are not absolutely necessary. 
 
 X. 
 
 Responsibility of the Bar Relative to the Jury System. 
 The Bar must hold its own apathy largely respon- 
 
18 
 
 sible for the disrespect into which the jury system has 
 fallen. In all cases a lawyer is responsible to his 
 professional brethren for his own conduct and the 
 conduct of his employees in relation to the jury. Ex- 
 isting conditions demand that he also be held printa 
 facie responsible for any misconduct in the same re- 
 gard by his client or his client's employees. To that 
 end it is declared that henceforth the lawyer repre- 
 senting the side employing improper means with a 
 jury is presumed to be the responsible source of such 
 scandal, and where such improper conduct is shown 
 to have been employed, it is essential to the profes- 
 sional standing of the lawyer representing the side 
 involved that he exonerate himself before the organ- 
 ized Bar from complicity in it or connivance at it. 
 
 All attempts to curry favor with juries by fawning, 
 flattery, or pretended solicitude for their personal 
 comfort are unprofessional. Suggestions of counsel 
 looking to the comfort or convenience of jurors, and 
 propositions to dispense with argument, should be 
 made to the court out of the jury's hearing. 
 
 A lawyer must never converse privately with 
 jurors or prospective jurors, and both before and 
 during the trial he should avoid communicating with 
 them even as to matters foreign to the cause. 
 
 It is not professional for a lawyer to offer evi- 
 dence which he knows the court should reject in order, 
 under the guise of arguing its admissibility, to get 
 the same before the jury, nor should a lawyer ad- 
 dress to the judge arguments or statements known 
 to be foreign to the issue. 
 
19 
 
 It is particularly reprehensible to introduce into an 
 argument addressed to the court remarks or state- 
 ments intended to influence the jury or prospective 
 jurors in the cause. 
 
 It is disreputable and unprofessional to make, in 
 an opening statement to the jury, or in an offer to 
 prove, assertions which a lawyer knows he cannot or 
 will not be permitted to prove. 
 
 A too narrow application of existing rules oper- 
 ates to relieve a large part of the most intelligent 
 portion of the community from jury duty. The 
 obligation rests upon the Bar to strive for greater 
 liberality in these rules to the end that juries may 
 possess the intelligence essential to true fair- 
 mindedness. 
 
 The members of the Bar who make up the 
 judiciary are respectfully admonished that it is the 
 concensus of opinion of this Association that the 
 latitude often permitted counsel conducting jury 
 trials, particularly in criminal cases, tends to con- 
 fuse the issue, to improperly bias the jury, and to 
 defeat the ends of justice; and it is the intent of 
 this code respectfully to remind the Bench that it 
 is the duty of the courts, in their ethical relations to 
 the Bar, to hold all counsel strictly and impar- 
 tially to the issues involved, in criminal and civil 
 jury trials, and to enforce their orders and ad- 
 monitions given to that end with all of the powers 
 at their command. 
 
20 
 
 XI. 
 
 The Conduct of Criminal Causes. 
 
 This Association takes notice of the opinion ex- 
 pressed by the Chief Executive of the Nation him- 
 self a distinguished lawyer and judge that the 
 administration of the criminal law is a disgrace to 
 our institutions. It further recognizes that the 
 remedy lies to a large extent in the domain of 
 legal ethics. It therefore lays down the following 
 canons which should be obvious but which it be- 
 lieves have been generally disregarded in the trial 
 of criminal causes: 
 
 The lawyer's right and obligation to defend per- 
 sons charged with crime carries with it no duty and 
 no right to prostitute either the letter or the spirit 
 of the law. 
 
 The lawyer's primary obligation, as an officer of 
 the court, to assist in the administration of justice, 
 is neither abrogated nor diminished by his appoint- 
 ment or retainer to defend a person charged with 
 crime. 
 
 A lawyer who invents or manufactures defenses 
 for prisoners, or who procures their acquittal by the 
 practice of any manner of deceit, cajolery, wilful 
 distortion, or misrepresentation of facts, or any 
 other means not within the spirit as well as the 
 letter of the law, is to be reckoned as an enemy 
 to society more dangerous than the criminal him- 
 eelf ; while successes at the Bar won by such meth- 
 
21 
 
 ods can never be the basis of desirable professional 
 reputations, but, on the contrary, are badges of in- 
 famy. 
 
 'Whenever an attorney's professional obligation 
 compels him to bring about the acquittal of a per- 
 son charged with crime through the advancement of 
 a legal proposition foreign to the guilt or innocence 
 of the accused, his success is to be regarded both 
 by him and by his professional brethren rather as 
 the culmination of a regrettable duty than as a pro- 
 fessional triumph. 
 
 ' Lawyers representing the people in public prose- 
 cutions should use every proper means to lay be- 
 fore the jury the cause of the people, and should 
 strive to prevent miscarriages of justice through 
 the exercise by persons accused of crime, or those 
 acting in their behalf, of any improper or corrupt 
 means. 
 
 In the criminal law it must be remembered that 
 the people rightfully demand, and are entitled to, 
 not only the conviction of the guilty but the acquit- 
 tal of the innocent as well. 
 
 To the extent of a full recognition -of the fore- 
 going principles, the feelings of the attorney charged 
 with the prosecution or with the defense may prop- 
 erly enter into his client's cause, but beyond this 
 lie should avoid bringing his personality or his 
 personal feelings or beliefs into a criminal cause. 
 
22 
 
 XII. 
 
 Paramount Ethical Obligation. 
 
 As a final and emphatic canon in this its Code 
 of Ethics, the Bar Association of San Francisco 
 admonishes the profession that its members are 
 officers of the court charged with the high duty of 
 aiding in the administration of justice, and that 
 this duty enters into and must be recognized as 
 the dominant factor in the interpretation of any 
 obligation resting upon the lawyer to further the 
 interests of his clients or to maintain successfully 
 their causes. 
 
205700