The Washington times., 1905-05-07

by the District Attorney, upon prob
able cause, to be presented to the
court in general term; an order made
by the court, q copy Of which must
be served upon the attorney COM
planned of, requiring the accused to
appear and answer, at time des-
ignated, and show cause why he
should not be suspended or disbarred
Now. the vice of this rule is that it
shifts the duty of the bench to the
shoulders OF the District Attorney
It is a perfectly proper rule as far as
1t goes, but it does not provide for
those cases where under the common
law, as well as by statute, the court
is empowered to proceed summarily
of its own motion and at once to puri-
fly the personnel Of its bar. Com
plant after complaint has rotted in
the pigeonholes of the District At
torney's Office, because that Office is
too busy with more important mat
ters; complaints that should be made
men are too tiraid to submit; and in
the meantime the bench, Narcissus
like, actually ysarns with admiration
OF its own duty well done
The duties and powers of the bench,
independently of the statutes, have
been laid down over and over again
in cases of unquestioned weight and
authority.
Perhaps the leading case upon the
subject in this country is ex parte
Wall, 107 U. S. 265, where Mr.. Justice
Bradley in delivering the opinion of
the Supreme Court of the United
States said. quoting from Chief JUS
tice Sharswood of Pennsylvania: I'VE
entertain no doubt that a court has
jurisdiction without any formal COM
plant or petition, upon its own mo-
ton, to strike the name of an attorney
from the roll in proper case, provid-
ed he has had reasonable notice. and
been afforded an opportunity to be
heard in his defense" And, proceed
ing to consider the matter imme-
diately before the court and speaking
with all its authority, he added: IA
court has power 10 exercise a sum-
mary jurisdiction over its attorneys TO
compel them TO act honestly toward
their clients, and to punish them by
fine and Imprisonment for misconduct
and contempts, and, in gross cases of
misconduct, TO strike their names
from the roll. If regularly convicted
OF felony, an attorney will be struck
off the roll as of course, whatever the
felony may be, because he is render
ed Infamous. If convicted of a mis-
demeanor which imports fraud or dis
honesty, the same course will be
taken. He will also be struck off the
roll for gross malpractice OF dfshon-
esty in his profession, or for conduct
gravely affecting his professional
character. .
Going further, the court quotes with
approval from Lord Mansfield: s'The
question is, whether, after the CON
duct OF this man, it is proper that he
should continue member of a pro-
fession which should stand free from
all suspicion. It is not by
way of punishment; but the court in
such cases exercise their discretion,
whether man whom they have for
merly admitted is proper person to
be continued on the roll or not
This case of ex parte Wall shows
the learning, acumen, and research
for which Mr.. Justice Bradley was so
justly celebrated. After discussing
the English cases bearing upon the
subject, he quotes with approval from
Lord Chief Justice Coekburn: Where
an attorney is shown TO have been
guilty OF gross fraud. although not
such as to render him liable to an
nor committed by him
while the relation of attorney and
client was subsisting between him and
the person defrauded, or in his char
acter as an attorney, the court will
not allow suitOrs to be exposed TO
gross fraud and dishonesty at the
hands of its officers -
The limits Of editorial space have
been passed in this article, but the
limits of public patience were passed
long ago, and it may be well to quote
in closing the conclusion of the Su-
preme Court of the United States in
the case cited:
From this review of the authorities
IN this country it is apparent, that
whilst it may be the general rule that
4 previous conviction should be had
before striking an attorney off the roll
for an indictable offense, committed
by him when not acting in his char
acter of an attorney, yet that rule is
not an inflexible one. Cases may oc-
cur in which such requirement
would result in allowing persons to
practice as attorneys, who ought, on
every ground of Dropriety and respect
Tor the administration OF the law. to