resulted in his being defeated. The service of the Association in relieving sitting judges of the invidious task of participating in the steps required under the direct primary law to secure their renomination cannot be passed without notice. This work involved considerable labor and expense and for years it was done on the initiative and under the direction of the Judiciary Committee.

Many members of the Association have recently expressed the view that the Association ought in some way to be more active in its efforts to secure the nomination and election of judges who come up to a standard of character, learning and experience higher than that attained through the ordinary process of selection by political parties. There is a marked difference of opinion as to how much more the Association may wisely do than it has in the past. But it seems fairly clear that the time has arrived when a re-examination of the whole subject should be made. This is not the first time when such a situation has arisen; for upon the report of a special committee appointed in 1898 to consider whether the Association could increase its influence upon judicial nominations, it was determined to extend its activities.

The Association came into existence as a result of an effort to purge the bench of crass corruption which had been one of the means by which the so-called Tweed Ring had been able to make effective some of its corrupt designs. Through the efforts of an able and courageous committee of this Association, with the united support of its membership, not only were corrupt judges driven from the bench by impeachment or forced resignation, but the Association became the medium

through which public opinion uttered a warning that judicial corruption would not longer be tolerated. If this Association had done nothing more, this service would have entitled it to the thanks of posterity. But it has not hesitated since 1870 to act upon charges involving judicial improprieties, though, fortunately, the occasion has not often arisen for such action. In five notable cases the Association has taken action, and its bold position has undoubtedly had a salutary effect. In one instance the inaction of a timorous legislature defeated the efforts of the Association. But in 1892 its activities contributed largely to the defeat by one hundred thousand majority of an unfit candidate for the position of judge of the Court of Appeals. Its protest in another case in 1898 against the action of a political leader in refusing to renominate a worthy judge, while it did not result in the election of the judge, had the kind of political effect which party leaders are not accustomed to ignore.

I recall these instances as a background. They ought not to be forgotten, for they undoubtedly have had a cumulative effect which still survives in the minds of political managers. They do not, however, solve the problem. Only constant vigilance and repeated and persistent effort can avail anything; and even then discouraging obstacles will be encountered, first, in limitations inherent in an Association which is non-partisan and professional, and, second, in the normal disparity between the vote of the two larger parties within this judicial district.

It will be admitted that a bar association will lose its influence if it permits itself to be swayed in its judgment of judicial candidates by political preferences. It can

properly concern itself only with the fitness and character of candidates. And this our Association has always striven to do. But in spite of what has been done by the Association, political considerations continue to influence nominations to an undue extent. As a result the voter is too often forced to choose from a group of mediocre candidates; and it is that situation which not infrequently confronts a bar association seeking, after the nominations have been made, to advise the public.

This Association has sometimes been successful in securing the coöperation of the minority party, which, of course, is always ready to take action which will attract political support; and the dominant party has sometimes been led by fear of such tactics to improve the quality of its nominees.

Prior to the judicial nominations in 1923, the j~diciary committees of this Association and of the County Lawyers' Association invited representatives of the two larger parties to a joint conference; and it is a significant fact that for the first time since the organization of this Association a representative of the dominant political party of this city, which has heretofore ignored bar associations as factors, attended the conference. It was clear that it would have been impossible for the Committees to force the political parties to accept persons suggested by them, even if it had been deemed wise to make the effort. They did, however, induce the political leaders to abandon the consideration of some candidates upon the ground that their nomination, if made, would not receive the approval of the Committees. After the nominations had been made the Committee of this Association examined with thoroughness and impartiality the qualifications of the candidates. It

made a lengthy report, which was discriminating and afforded to an intelligent person a basis for a reasonably accurate selection. It has been said that the Committee gave its approval to candidates who failed to come up to an ideal standard of fitness. Probably this is true. But the insistence upon such a standard would have excluded many who were approved. The Committee was forced to deal practically with the situation and a comparative estimate among a number of candidates failing to reach the theoretically ideal standard seemed the only sensible expedient. Some have urged that there should have been a preferential rating of all the candidates. But it would have been a delicate and difficult task to give a preference to one candidate over another, and it would inevitably have aroused among our own members antagonisms based upon personal or political predilections.

It is not safe to be dogmatic upon such a subject as this. But it is a time for constructive suggestion. If the disparity between the two parties were smaller, so that the bar by actively entering into politics might affect the result, it could undoubtedly coerce political leaders. But existing political conditions cannot wisely be ignored; and one thing which must be reckoned with is that with the normal predominance of one of the two great political parties, an independent movement, even in conjunction with the minority party, does not hold out promise of favorable results. In 1906 ten new justices of the Supreme Court were to be elected. The lawyers organized a political body called the Judiciary Nominators and nominated a most excellent judiciary ticket. A large fund for expenses was raised. The campaign was organized and conducted under the most

favorable auspices. Many of the most prominent lawyers thoroughly canvassed the city in support of the candidates. Widespread publicity was given to the movement by the press. And yet, with all this effort, all of the candidates of the dominant political party were elected by hardly less than the normal majorities.

But such experiences ought not to close the subject to further discussion; and I suggest a few expedients for consideration.

The report of the Judiciary Committee may perhaps be expressed with more emphatic and discriminating implication. Emphasis may also be added if after the report has been sent to the members of the Association their choice of candidates be ascertained upon a referendum. The result of such a step ought to have considerable influence. It would at least receive the attention of the press as something tangible. The Association could also assume more responsibility than it has in the past, in giving publicity to its recommendations and to the result of a referendum; for the value of a report of the Judiciary Committee lies in its being made available to voters. It happened in the last campaign that the report was read at a meeting attended by only about 125 members. It was published in full but once and in a single newspaper. It received practically no other publicity, except that given to extracts relating to individual candidates, which they published in aid of their own candidacy. So far, therefore, as affording a basis for an intelligent judgment by the voters, it played an insignificant part. But effective publicity would involve a large expense and the financial condition of this Association has not been such as to justify it in undertaking, single-handed, such a campaign. The members of the