New Britain herald., 1915-01-25
STATE BAR MEMBERS 1 MEET AT HARTFORD Former Attorney General Phelps
 PrcSideS at Convention. ANNUAL BANQUET THIS EVENING

Delivers Address on Efficiency in
 the Administration of Justice'-
 Officers to Be Elected.
 Hartford, Conn.,, Jan 25.-Lawyers from all over the state were in at tendance at the annual meeting of the State Bar Association of Connecticut which convened in the supreme court room in this city today. Former At torney General Charles Phelps of Rockville, the president, presided. This year is the fortieth anniversary ot the founding of the association. Among the distinguished members and guests were former President William Howard Taft, Governor Marcus H. Holcomb and former Governor Simeon E., Baldwin. There was an address on Efficiency in the administration of justice,' by Edward A. Hartman of New Haven. Reports were submitted and discussion followed
 John H. Perry of Southport, George D. Watrous of New Haven and George
  tee to. bring in nominations for off, cers. It is expected that Vice Presi- dent William Waldo Hyde of this city will be elevated to the presidency in conformity with the rule of the asso- ciation. The annual banquet will be held in the assembly hall of the Hart ford club this evening" Addresses will be given by Samuel J. Elder. of Rr Stn of hp Ia ck k1I- setts Bar Association, Judge William s. Case of the Connecticut superior court, and former President Taft. The justices of the supreme court will attend.
 The meeting discussed a proposed resolution authorizing the governor to appoint commission to revise probate law and procedure. A com mittee reported adversely on a prop osition that states attorneys should not practice in civil jury cases; also adversely that states attorneys should act in common pleas criminal cases.
 History of Revision.
 John H. Light, chairman. of the committee soui pFopuse,s revision of the committee. The report gives a his
 
 1850 and 1902, and says:
 If the present legislation authorizes a revision of the statutes the commit tee will have the revision of 1902, comprising fifteen hundred and five pages, and, by estimate, two thou sand and seventy public acts, covering twenty-five hundred and seventy-six pages.
 The work of revision has not always been we'll done. It has been as various as the men who have composed the different committees but on the whole the committees have been chosen be- cause of special fitness, and the work has been creditably performed.
 Index Not Good.
 Several revisions have not contained a good index. This is notably true of the last revision, and many of the subsequent public acts. Apparently the secretary of state has given lit tie heed to the requirements of sec- ton 103 of the general statutes.
 It has been the practice for the secretary to have some young clerk in his office prepare indexes to the legis- lature of each session of the general assembly, and therefore, it is not sur- rrising that we have so many poor indexes.
 We believe it to be the duty of this association to take proper steps to have the secretary of state appoint a skilled person. to prepare indexes to the legislation of the present ses- sion of the general assembly.
 New Revision Necessary
 We also believe that the time is Sin ,f necticut statutes, and that this asso- citation should take necessary steps to obtain the usual legislative author ity for such a revision.
 A report of the committee on ap- pcals to the supreme court by James P. Andrews, William Waldo Hyde and Charles F. Waller, was in part as fullows
 Your committee are of the opinion that the fundsm entaI defect with our existing procedure, in so far as 1t ap plies to civil actions tried to the court, is, that judgment is rendered before the facts are found, or at all events before they are set forth in detail Your committee feels that a consid- erable percentage of the so-called facts detailed in the draft and coun- ter-findings are not material to the issue. and that their insertion only tends to confuse and mislead.
 Not Simple Affair.
 Aside from the objection that this method of procedure is often times misleadin and confusing, it compels one side or the other, and sometimes perhaps both sides, to argue case in the appellate court which was not the simple affair presented by them to the trial judge below.
 Still another objection Is the cost useless cost-Of printing d catalogue