HYPNOTISM AS AN EXCUSE FOR CRIME. and what has to be decided is, not whether the per

is no reason why the

United States and way. Its provisions mainly treat the subject of the State Reports should not be gotten out and Supreme Court Reporter as though that office were given gratis to all law libraries in the country created by the act. No attempt is made to repeal and sold at a cost not to exceed $1.50 per volume by chapter or section its law, which authorizes the to private citizens. They are all "fat" work, no existence of the present Supreme Court Reportermaps, few if any cuts, these mainly in the United ship. The text of the bill is: States Reports, and yet we have paid as high as Section 1. Within thirty days after the passage $15 a volume for State Reports. The New York of this act the governor shall appoint and thereafter State Reports are really the cheapest, but are fol- shall have power to remove, a reporter of the lowed closely by Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. supreme court of the State of New York, who shall As a fact, we have to pay most for the poorest law possess all the powers and be subject to all printing and binding. The reports should be in all the obligations now imposed by law upon the cases, as they are now only in part, issued by the present reporter of the supreme court of the State State and the reporter be paid a salary. Digests of New York, provided that in any contract for the and Session Laws are even worse than the reports. publication of said reports there shall be paid by I am pleased at the issue of the New York Reports the contractor to the State treasurer for the use of in cloth, and have so written the publishers. But the State the sum of one thousand dollars per the reporter business ought to be more and better systematized. The "combine" secured the printing of the United States Reports which should be done by the government. These, and decisions of Interstate Commerce Commission, are the only reports, and with Post-office Guide, the only official documents printed by private parties, so far as I am After the subject of reports and reporter, I wish you would pay your respects to the subject of digests and digest-makers. As hinted in my paper above referred to, there is much poor work done there and all on account of jobbery.

aware.

The ALBANY LAW JOURNAL has not forgotten its promise to give its readers some farther information, with specifications, as to the amount of money which the present Supreme Court Reporter of this State is drawing. While we have not been able to complete our inquiries as yet, we are confident the result will bear out our previous statement to the effect that the reporter referred to is drawing something over $25,000 a year. We may also be able to give our readers some idea of the amount of service he renders in return for this large emolument.

volume, for each and every volume issued.

"Sec. 2. All acts and parts of acts inconsistent herewith, are hereby repealed."

Mr. Hun made the following statement to the Sunday Press reporter regarding the bill:

"I did not know of the bill being introduced until after you spoke to me about it. I don't think that the bill can legislate the present Supreme Court Reporter out of office. I was selected for five years. The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court has the sole right to select the reporter. Contracts have likewise been made that cannot be repudiated. The legislature may have the power to alter the details of management connected with the office, but I do not think it can legislate me out of office and give the power of selection to the governor. There is a great deal of work attached to this office, although many people seem to magine that it is the easiest kind of a matter to attend to it. The bill is not Possibly the legislature might pass it regardless of their right to do so. I think the suit of Banks against Hun proved that nothing can be done to repudiate contracts already

very coherently drawn.

made."

Under the present system it is said that the remuneration received by Mr. Hun from his reports amounts to nearly $20,000 per annum. In this respect the office differs from that of Court of Appeals Reporter and Miscellaneous Court Reporter.

A BILL TO LEGISLATE MARCUS T. HUN Both of the latter officials received a stated salary

OUT OF OFFICE.

(From the Albany Sunday Press, March 3, 1901.)

Assemblyman Waldo R. Blackwell, of Kings county, wants to legislate Marcus T. Hun out of office as Supreme Court Reporter. Mr. Blackwell introduced a bill to accomplish this purpose last Thursday in the assembly. What Mr. Blackwell's reasons are for depriving Mr. Hun of his office do not appear, but the impression has gone abroad that he thinks that Mr. Hun is making too much money. The bill is very terse in text, and although it makes allusion to the office of Supreme Court Reporter as it exists at present, it does it in an indirect

per annum. Attempts have been made before this to alter the Supreme Court Reporter system so as to make the office a salaried one, but they have come to nothing. Last year Mr. Hun issued about twelve volumes. From these it is said that the gross return was about $24,000, of which $5,000 was paid out to assistants, etc.

The present contract is with James B. Lyon. Under one clause of the bill the contractor is to pay to the State treasurer $1,000 for every volume issued. This practically means a tax by the State on the printing of the reports of about $12,000 a year. Such an assessment would reduce the revenue of the Supreme Court Reporter in proportion.

The Supreme Court Reporter's income, under the

present system which Mr. Hun operates, is considered by Albany lawyers to be even more than the figures quoted. It is recalled by them that at a hearing on a bill in the legislature about five years ago it was shown that Mr. Hun receives nearly 700 per cent more for his books that what they can be issued for at a reasonable profit. The hearing was on a bill permitting other reports than those of Mr. Hun to be quoted. It was admitted then by Mr. Hun that the Court of Appeals had adopted a rule requiring all lawyers to quote the Hun reports only. The fight was led by the West Publishing Company, which had theretofore published the report at five dollars a year. As soon as the Court of Appeals

rule went into effect Mr. Hun who had been charg

ing three dollars a volume for reports raised the price to five dollars a volume. This was practically compelling lawyers to pay sixty dollars for what they theretofore had paid five dollars. C. H. Mills, as counsel for Little & Co., publishers, offered Mr. Hun $2,500 per volume for just the proofs of his reports that they might publish them. They claimed that even at this figure they would have made $1,000 per volume. The reports issued by the Court of Appeals Reporter and the Miscellaneous Court Reporter average forty-nine cents to eighty cents a volume.

[The above will be of special interest to the legal profession, and our readers will note that it is exactly in line with what the ALBANY LAW JOURNAL has repeatedly asserted, viz., that Mr. Hun has long been in the enjoyment of a larger income than almost any salaried officer in the United States, the president of the United States excepted. We have positive information that the Appellate Division Reporter last year received more than $25,000 net, and there is in the newly-executed contract, which he declares the legislature possesses no power to abrogate (though we may be able to show that he is mistaken), a clause which requires the contractor to pay for certain opinions, thus adding several thousand dollars more to his fat income. It seems not unlikely that the legislature will ask for information on the subject, in which event the public will be given the "true inwardness" of this matter. Turn on the light!]—Ed. ALBANY LAW JOURNAL.

JOHN MARSHALL DAY IN ALBANY.

The Hon. William B. Hornblower, of New York, president of the New York State Bar Association, welcomed the visitors, saying: (6 Ladies and Gentlemen:

"As this celebration is held under the joint auspices of the New York State Bar Association and of the Bar Association of the City of New York, it devolves upon me, in my official character, as president of the State Bar Association, to welthis occasion. In so doing I shall not undertake come you and to introduce the presiding officer of to usurp the functions of the presiding officer and shall. It is sufficient for me to say that, while of the orator of the day by eulogizing John MarGeorge Washington is recognized as the father of of the Declaration of Independence, and their his country and Thomas Jefferson as the author names and deeds are household words with all Americans, the fame of John Marshall is more exclusively a professional fame among our own prothis centennial fession, and it is fitting that on anniversary of his accession to the bench and to the great office of Chief Justice of the United States an effort should be made on behalf of the bar of the country to impress upon the minds of their fellowcitizens generally what they owe to this great jurist. With this in view, the American Bar Association, at its meeting in 1899, adopted resolutions looking toward a fit commemoration of this day throughout the United States. In pursuance of these resolutions celebrations have been arranged for and are this day being held, as we understand, in every State in the Union under the auspices of the bar of each State, and also in various cities of the United States, the main celebration being held under the auspices of the American Bar Association itself, in the city of Washington, participated in by the Supreme Court of the United States and the chief officers of the government, and presided over by the present Chief Justice of the United States. The Bar Association of the City of New York, through its executive committee, appointed a special committee to consider what action should be taken on their behalf. It seemed to them that the most fitting and dignified mode of celebrating the fame of the great Chief Justice would be by such an occasion as this, where the representatives of the bar of this great State should come together in the capitol of the State, presided over by the head of the State judiciary, and addressed by one of the leaders of our State and federal bar. The Bar Association of the City of New York, therefore, instructed its committee of arrangements to co-operate with the State Bar Association in arranging for this celebration.

The bar of the State honored the memory of Chief Justice John Marshall on February fourth last at a meeting held in the assembly chamber, State capitol. A large and distinguished audience particpated in the exercises, which were opened with music. The Rev. Dr. A. V. V. Raymond made | "It is safe to say that no one man in the history a short prayer. The Hon. William Hornblower, of this country has left a greater impress, not only president of the New York State Bar Association, on the jurisprudence of the country, but upon the then made a short address. He was followed by Chief Judge Alton B. Parker, of the Court of Appeals, and by Judge Dillon, of New York, the chief speaker of the occasion.

very frame-work of our institutions, than John Marshall. While he did not make the Constitution of the United States, he shaped it by his powerful and lucid opinions and by his influence with the

great court over which he presided. Indeed, it may constitutional was written by him in Marbury v. almost be said that, if he did not make the Consti- Madison. This famous opinion which asserted for tution, he saved it; for, had he not assumed his the first time a principle which lies at the very office at the present period when he did and delivered foundation of constitutional jurisprudence, was folthe magnificent series of opinions which came from lowed by about thirty-four other opinions written his lips and from his pen, which welded together the by him in cases involving constitutional questions, sovereign and independent States of the Union through which it was demonstrated that the capaciand which armed the federal government with the ties of the federal Constitution were equal to all power necessary to preserve our institutions while the demands of the government that could be propguarding the reserved rights of the States and the erly made upon it. citizens thereof, the fair fabric which had been constructed by the Constitutional Convention of 1789 and which had been so unwillingly adopted by many of the States, notwithstanding the urgency of such men as Hamilton, Madison and Jay, would have fallen to pieces under the strain of the conflicting interests of its various constituents.

"But all this will be told you much better than I can tell it by those who are to follow me. We are fortunate in having secured as the orator of the day that distinguished and able member of our bar who served so acceptably and so usefully upon the federal bench in the Eighth Circuit, and who is eminently qualified to portray the character and set forth the services of John Marshall.

"It is appropriate that this celebration should be presided over by the head of the State judiciary, the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals. The present incumbent of that high office was called to it by the people of the State at an unusually early age, and we trust that he will be continued by the suffrages of his fellow-citizens in that position until the revolving wheel of time shall have compelled him to retire by reason of the age limit fixed by our Constitution. He is a worthy successor of his

able predecessors, such men as Church, and Folger.

and Ruger, and Earl, and Andrews.

Chief Judge Parker said:

"Mr. President, Gentlemen of the New York State
Bar Association and of the Association of the
Bar of the City of New York, Ladies and
Gentlemen:

"In the national capital and in many, if not all, of the State capitals, as well as in a number of the large cities of this country, the bench and the bar, under the leadership of associations of the bar, are this day commemorating the one hundredth anniversary of the day when John Marshall, of Virginia, took his seat as Chief Justice of the United States. While not unmindful of his merit as a soldier, his success as an advocate, his achievements as a diplomat, and his career as a statesman, it is, after all, his matchless services to the people of this country, as Chief Justice of the United States, during the more than thirty-four years that he discharged the duties of that great office, that easily entitle his name to be placed above those of all the other great jurists of this country on its roll of fame.

"Although the court had been in existence eleven years when he entered it, the opinion supporting the first decision declaring an act of congress un

'One of his associates in the court for many years, Mr. Justice Story, spoke of these opinions after the death of the Chief Justice as those exquisite judgments, the fruits of his own unassisted meditations from which the court has received so much honor.' When we recall the names of the great jurists who were associated with Chief Justice Marshall, we are tempted to regard Mr. Justice Story's statement as a little too generous, and yet the records afford striking evidence of his commanding position among his brethren, for we find that he not only wrote more than three-fifths of all the opinions written on constitutional questions, but that every opinion, save one, in the first volume of Cranch's Reports, embracing the work of the court for two years, was written by him.

"It is true that no other judge in this country ever had so great an opportunity, but it is at least doubtful whether any other of our great jurists would have proved so well fitted for it, had the opportunity been presented to him which came to Chief Justice Marshall.

66

But strong as was his common sense, comprehensive his mental grasp, irresistible his logic and

indefatigable his industry, yet to him was not solely
due those masterful opinions. Great lawyers, like
Webster, Pinckney, Wirt, Dexter and others famous
at the bar of that court, contributed by their illu-
mination of the questions involved to the glorious
results achieved, just as their brethren at the bar
have contributed to every judicial decision tending
towards either the harmonious working out of our
scheme of government or the safeguarding of the
liberties of the citizen. In the same general di-
rection the future-perhaps the immediate future-
is likely to present questions of momentous public
importance; for a careful observer of the tendency
of the times must appreciate that other and very
different constitutional questions than those passed
on in Chief Justice Marshall's time will, probably,
In-
be presented to both federal and State courts.
deed, there are now pending in the Supreme Court
of the United States governmental questions of far-
reaching importance that were probably not even
thought of in Chief Justice Marshall's day.

"It is, therefore, not only just to the memory of the great jurist that we meet in recognition of our indebtedness as a people for his wise and brilliant services in the formative period of our governmental development, but it is also wise for us, in view of the problems that the future has in store, to turn aside from our usual labors for a little while

to study the masterpieces of his judicial work and The springs in the mountains where rivers rise, recount his glorious achievements to the end that And towns by the seas bring their sacrifice. both the bench and the bar may be stimulated to * emulate his example by patriotically striving to have the great questions of the future disposed of as they shall arise by decisions resting upon broad

Calvert and Williams blaze new pathways for men. United States will be prominently displayed, includ