Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-05-05
Brandeis and Legal Ethics

"A of Louis d. Brandes, that distinguished
advocate has destroyed the confidence of his
profession by wrapping himself in
sort of self-sutticiency Of his conscience
and carrying out his own IDEALS That
charge is based on Mr. Brandeiss conduct
in the railroad rate case. in which, while act
ing counsel for the Interstate Commerce
Commission, he admitted the net earnings of
the railroads concerned were inadequate
This high crime and msdemeanor earned
for the nominee the opposition of Senator
Cummins who found nothing else to criticize.
Mr.. Cummins seems to have thought that if
Mr.. Brandeis reached a conclusion adverse
TO the contentious of the shippers, one
phase of the controversy, he should have kept
that conviction to himself.
Legal ethics may make this demand on the
advocate--although we do not believe it
but that circumstance would not indicate Mr..
Brandeis was wrong. 1t would show rather
that the legal code requires revision. Mr..
Brandeis was the counsel for the commission
and so in very intimate sense the friend
of the court" His clients were not merely
the complainants in the pending controversy,
but the whole people OF the United States
His duty was to see justice done, and to aid
the commission in arriving at just con-
clusion.
AS the result of long and patient investiga-
ton, aided by a brilliant intellect he con-
receiving fair return their investment
That was all His further contention it will
be remembered, was that the railroads them
selves were responsible in large part for this
deficiency in net earnings, because they had
refused TO put into operation various econo-
mics and e1iciences that he suggested Time
ana the war nave united to prove that in the
matter of economies Mr. Brandeis was en-
trely right. Under stress, new methods OF
efficiency have been installed and waste elm
mated so That one of the most striking de.
'eiopments OF railroad history in the last six
months has been the decrease in the ratio of
operating expense to gross revenue and the
resulting increase in net earnings
Perhaps Mr.. Brandeis was legal-ethically
wrong in taking this position-although, as
we have said. we don't believe it-but prac-
tlcally, and economically, and morally he has
been justified n thousand times In the first
place, he aided the commission in arriving
at conclusion that the country now an
proves In the second place he aided the
railroads in saving millions Of dollars of
their shareholders money and. possibly In
keeping some OF them out of bankruntcv
His mastery analysis of the whole yexod
question free from every suggestion of pas
sion or prejudice contributed more than any
other single factor to public understanding.
me primary duty Of lawyer engaged in
public prosecutH," say the canons of ethics
OF the American Bar Associations lis NOT To
convict put to see that justice is done" Mr.
branoels, IN the rate hearing, was engaged
IN pubhc prosecution of the railroads, but
MS duty was not to force them into insol
Vency, but to see that justice was done That
seems TO be the mans theory of a lawver.s
junction and obligation. We think it is the
right theory