The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1896-07-09
ABOUT THAT LAwykK CONVENTION
AND LAwYERs.

BOUT THAT LAwykK CONVENTION
AND LAwYtRs.
IL IL difficult to comment, "a po-
itical way, on any class OF people,
,ither by criticism or commendation,
without mourning the charge OF be-
ing pfejudiced in favor of or against
that class, But despite this difficult
ly, after asserting that We are not
10 the least actuated by prejudice, we
intend to say something here about
lawyers III legislation.
IL was pointed out last week that
lawyers bad full control of the so
called Democratic State convention;
that they took nearly everything IN
sight in the way of nominations, and
that every man who had been nomi-
mated for Congress by tho Democrats
was lawyer. 1t was not asserted
nor will we ever assert that lawyers
should not hold office; but we want
to go on record as having firm con-
yiction that nothing can be more
dangerous to the people than a COM
plete control of their law making by
lawyers.
A lawyer is a man who is after a
fee. Ii is his business to make a fee.
There have been few cases, if indeed
there ever was a case in law, with a
side too mean for some lawyer to
take if the fee was forthcoming.
The ethics of the legal profession
are such as to justify the conscience
of the lawyer in defending known
scoundrel, on the ground that a man
is entitled to fair trial. We have
no argument to advance here against
this. IL is merely cited to emphasize
the fact that fec hunting IS the avo.
cation of the lawyer.
The last fow Congresses have beer
dominated by lawyers. In the pres
ent Congress, of the ninety member
of the Senate more than sixty ar
lawyers. Of the 500 members o
the House, more than go are law
yers. Thus, lawyers, as q class
dominate both branches of Congress
What are the records of these law
yer CougressesY What have the
done for the peopleG We let tn
people answer for themselves.
Being member of Congress doe
not debar a lawyer from continuin
the practice OF his profession. |
fact there is very frequent mentio
of lawyers leaving their seats to a.
tend To some law business. Their
il no restriction on the kind of legs
business he may attend to. II b
chooses, he may serve a monopol,
or ~ trust, or lobby, or railroa
corporation or anything else as leg'
counsel. These organizations al
always at the door of Congress seel
ing legislation in their own interes
and they always employ lawyers.
Now, if n lawyer who is a mer
Der OF Congress serves one of the
corporations as counsel, and ge
pay for 1t (and he does not usual
serve without pay he Violates /
propriety. He is LAWYER SERVE
HIS CLIENT and the pay he gets
called a FEE! But if member
Congress who Is NOT lawyer shou
serve these organizations in al
way, and should be caaght at
that member would be charged wi
ACCEPTING A BRIBE!! Do you Sc
We are not making any char
against lawyers. We are staff
facts, though, that cannot be {
med; and facts like these, with
possibilities that attend them, 8
dangerous. 1t is a fact that tn,
has been much legislation in fax
of trusts, railroad corporations a
the like, and it is fact that tn,
organizations always have repres,
tatives around the halls of Congr
seeking more special legislation.
is fact that they always emp
lawyers to aid and counsel the
and it is fact that, up to date, IL
have gotten pretty much every thi
they wanted, while the people hs
gotten nothing.
In conclusion, we emphatically
clare that lawyers have full q
unrestricted right to hold off
II they can bamboozle the PEG
into giving them ALL the off
they, perhaps, have right to
that. But in view of the fact {
the last Congresses have been oy
whelmingly dominated by them, ,
remembering the record of legi.
tion made by these Congresses,
think We have q right to decl
thar the people act unwisely in trl
ing their legisl alton to the hand.
y la~-maSirg body composed o
IL jority ut lawyers.