The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1903-07-28
THE ETHICS OF THE LEGAL PRO
FESSION.

given out that the liquor dealers would
not spend a dollar in the campaign and
would leave the issue to be settled by
bluff didn't fool anybody.
In yesterdays paper 1t was printed
that the liquor men held a conference to
plan for the campaign, and it Is stated
that thew have decided to retain" law
yers to manage their campaign. That Is
the report that is in circulation. There
is a difference between liquor dealers
meeting and deciding to retain lawyers
to conduct their fight and lawyers hiring
themselves for any such purpose. 1t IS
true that some lawyers, loving a dollar
more than the ethics of their calling,
have disgraced their profession by selling
their services to bar-keepers to run their
campaigns. But they are few IN num-
bers and they have forthwith lost stand
ing in their profession, and forfeited the
| respect of the people.
Understand u, please. 1t is legitimate
for a lawyer to accept "a fee to appear for
or against any measure before a legls-
Iative committee, whether for liquor men
or temperance men; it Is legitimate for
"a lawyer to take a fee for his opinion
upon any law or an election under any
law; it is legitimate for d lawyer to APP
pear in the courts or before a registrar
upon a legal question growing out of
registration or the right to vote; it is le-
| Ultimate for a lawyer to take a fee IN
case such an election is contested IN the
violating the ethics of his profession to
take a fee in Instances above cited from
either side. But when a lawyer accepts
what he calls a retainer to conduct the
campaign in a fight when the people are
trying to overthrow the saloon, he is do
ing an unprofessional act for which he
ought 10 be disbarred, and for which he
would be disbarred if the Bar Association
did its duty.
A lawyer is a citizen before he is a
lawyer. In the question of shutting up
the saloons in Raleigh, he IS interested as
a citizen. His position in the community
is one that calls upon him to take a stand
and throw the weight of his influence
(without pay either as a. so-called lee or
otherwise) upon the side that accords
with his convictions. If he believes IN
keeping the saloons open, he will vote
: against the proposition to close them, and
i, no man has a right to impugn his mo
a, tives. If he believes that they should be
+ closed, let him declare his position and
take a stand for a better Raleigh. Blu
E let him uphold the honor and dignity o.
~ his great profession and resent the asser-
>, ton of liquor dealers that they can hire
lawyers to conduct their campaign. Lee
: them conduct it themselves and let every
o member of the bar resent the imputatio1
put upon the profession.
l Suppose the liquor dealers should NEE
and decide to pay some editor to give hin
ID the use of his columns for presenting thei
4 opposition to closing up the shops wher
IL drunkards are made, and suppose an edito
would agree for a specific sum to ad
) vocate their cause and conduct their cam
paign. The editor would be on the sam
footing as the lawyer who would accep
De money to manage their campaign. Where
Is in lies the difference, if there is any
IS. would thus sell his columns. Is tn
a lawyer who for pay runs their campaig
sc any better than the editor who woul
~ sell his columns?
nv This is a question that deeply concern
pi the legal profession and the whole con
ely munity. The profession of law is a
~ honorable one. It has always had the r
U,s spect of the people because it has d
lg- served it.. Latterly-for the truth ougl
80 to be told-too many lawyers have f
nls money lobbied Legislatures, Town Cou
Nv ellis, County Commissioners; they hay
81 sought to unduly control jurymen or paC
iuries; have accepted pay for promotir
political or personal booms; and have f
money conducted campaigns for salool
= III prohibition or dispensary fights. Cor
ny pared with the whole number of the leg
profession, these have been few in nun
" Der. Some of them have, without refle
, ton, become guilty of this unprofession
= conduct. The result has been that the
course has injured the legal professio
" 1t does not stand as high in popular a
proval as it did in 1890, let US say. 1t
oys wrong that the majority of the profe
EN- sion should suffer for the sins of the mi
1ke GRITTY, but the public do not discrimina
has as they should, and may not be EXPECT
'wn to do so perfectly when men guilty.
ysi- gross and notorious unprofessional &C
duct are not disbarred or even called
account.
of
pie THE STOCK GAMBLING MANI