The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-08-10
WOULD RESTRICT
USE OF AL|Eu|STS
CONTINUED From First page.)

the redeeming spirit OF the people.
not In quack measures. The nation
needs master spirits like these of Old
Applause frequently interrupted
Judge Wallace, who was rendered the
thanks OF the association for his ad-
dress.
Judge S. C. Graham. of Tazewell, pre-
sen;ed the report of the committee to
recommend officers saying that the
committee founi some good presiden
tai timber in Tiiewater and in the uni
versities, but finally landed High
lander While not disposed to criticize
the law schools. Judge s. G. Graham
noted that only three law professors
were in attendance a the session of
the association these three being from
the oxford of America. the University
OF virginia" Judge Graham thought
! that the professors of Virginia law
| schools should attend the session OF
the association.
Officers Elected.
The officers nominated were unani-
mously elected. They we're:
President, j. f. Bullitt of Big Stone
! Gap; Vice Presidents-A r. Long. Of
/ Lynchburg. 10 represent Piedmont Vir-
sin!a; j. S Harnsberger. OF Harrison
nurs, TO represent the Valley section;
T. Chambers Goode, of Meck!cnburg
county, to represent Southaide Virginia
a ;. HiSginbotham. OF TaZewell to
represent the Southwestern section;
! hugh W. Davis, of Norfolk. to repre-
sent ridewater Virginia.
Two new members OF tho executive
committee were elected to succeed Hin
Montague and George w. Gresory. both
OF Richmond whose terms have ex-
pred Their successors are George
Bryan and j. j. Leake, both of Rich-
mond. John E. Minor was reelected
secretary and treasurer.
me Following delegates to the Amer
ican Bar Association were elected:
Judge L. L. Lewis. of Richmond; Sam
uei Grifhn' OF Bedford City: Thomas ".
shelton, of Norfolk; Professor r. c.
Minor. OF the University of Virginia.
ana James H. Corbit. of Suffolk.
There was considerable debate over
'ne expert testimony resolution and
other measures, in which 1T was gen
orally agreed that law reform is abso-
lute!y essential now.
roosevelt Page, of Hanover, who is
taxing a prominent part in the pro-
ceedings. pointed out in the course of
discussion that there often is practI-
eai 1us,iheation for the refusal OF the
General Assembly to adopt recon-
mendations of the Bar Association.
he referred to the Virginia House
Committee on the judiciary as com
posed OF men supposed to be law
yers-at any rate. licensed to prac
tice and admitted to the bar"
This characteristic allusion brought
down the house. Mr.. Page, in defense
of the position of members Of tho
General Assembly. explained that he
sometimes voted for n measure in the
association and against IT in the Leg
islaturc because of valid obstacles It
was so in the case Of the proposed
revision OF the Code. He voted for Il
| In the association, but when It ap-
peared that the State did not have the
$4,000 necessary for this work he
voted against 1t.
Abolition of Juries.
In the night session Walter II. Tay-
lor, OF Norfolk. one of the younger
members OF the bar, delivered a brief
but able address on THE Abolition
Of Jury Trials in Civil Cases"
An increasing number OF practitton-
ers. he said. are being converted 70
! the idea that In civil cases 1t is best
10 do away with the jury. IN several
branches of the law-admiralty, con-
demnation and others--no jury Is had
NO reason can be advanced why
juries should determine tho facts in
common law cases. he said.
Mr. Taylor would substitute for
jury three Judges Nowadays. he said
1uries too often misunderstood the
law, Judges are moro insensible to
pre1udices and passions.
Juries. Mr.. Taylor declared, too Of
ten decide case on account of
charming woman, saying: Not long
ago was consulted by a transpor tation
company as to its liability to q pretty
Girl. who had badly sprained her an
gle while passenger on the prem
Uses OF the company The company's
officials eontended that he step, on
which the girls ankle was sprained
was not negligently constructed. and
! that under the law. as they under
stood IL, the company was not liable
l told them that II was not question
| of legal theory. but ono of practical
conditions. If the case got to the