Georgia Bar Association 1886, p. 119.) And Dr. Samuel Johnson long ago said that, "No precedents can justify absurdity." In civil cases the Pleading Act of 1893 has been a great advance, and coupled with the Uniform Procedure Act of 1887, has done much to put our pleading and practice in such cases on a common-sense, substantial basis. Some improvements may still be made, where necessary; but this is progress in the right direction.

To borrow a figure of speech from Judge Dillon, with some alteration, it may be said that Justice to-day should not be represented as a goddess whose eyes are blindfolded, but as one with clear sight and far-reaching vision, holding aloft the torch of truth for the enlightenment of the world.

I realize the important part which fictions have played in the past growth of the law; but I think that fictitious pleading has no place in present day procedure. Mythology and mythological heroes were necessary to give to the world an Iliad and an Odyssey; literature has been enriched by fiction; fairy stories and folk-lore (like that which our own Georgia author, Joel Chandler Harris, has so admirably preserved for posterity) have entertained and gladdened the days of childhood. But none of these have a legitimate place in twentieth century pleading.

Our criminal laws need some amendment. In the days when in England about two hundred offenses were punished with death, this was in a measure offset by technical safeguards and loopholes for the prisoner to escape conviction. Some of this system still stands. It should be changed, to adjust it to the administration of present day criminal law. Substance should be required in criminal pleading, but a guilty defendant should not be allowed to escape because of some mere immaterial inaccuracy, which cannot be amended. Truth, not triviality, is the aim of the law.

I have already passed beyond the limit of a brief address, and cannot enter into a more detailed discussion. But with the Common Law, splendid in many respects, as a basis of our system, and with the wealth of the Civil Law to draw from, there

was never a time when, holding fast to what is best, and laying aside the worn-out and useless trappings of by-gone years, justice should shine with purer light, or when it should be more true, in the language of the Great Charter, that "to none will we deny, to none will we delay right or justice." And so it may be, if love of justice finds its home in our hearts and the hearts of our fellow-citizens.

In the very beginning of creation when darkness brooded over chaos, we are told by the writer of Genesis that the first command ever given and one of the grandest, was "Let there be light." And if sometimes, in the search for truth, those who make or construe the laws stray into the by-paths of error, or wander in the darkness of perplexity and doubt, may the shadows be dispelled and darkness be driven from the onward pathway by that same glorious mandate, "Let there be light"-Light-LIGHT!

APPENDIX G.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON JURISPRUDENCE,

LAW REFORM, AND PROCEDURE.

To the Georgia Bar Association:

The Committee on Jurisprudence, Law Reform, and Procedure, beg to report as follows:

Ist.

The Committee strongly urges the recommendation, made by its predecessors more than once, that certainly as to undefended cases, the law should be so changed as to admit of judgment, or verdict and judgment, at the first term, and that the appearance call in all the Superior Courts shall be held on the second day of each term of court, thus requiring pleadings to be filed on the opening day of the term. The Committee have formulated an Act to bring about this result, and the same is attached as a part of this report, marked "Exhibit A."

2d. The statutory provisions of this State relative to probate and execution of foreign wills, are in many respects contradictory, and doubt has developed as to proper procedure thereunder. To correct this evil, your Committee have formulated and attach hereto as "Exhibit B," a proposed Act of the Legislature amending Sections 3299, 3304, 3305, 3306 and 3524 of the Code of 1895. The substance of this bill is briefly stated thus: It admits to probate for all purposes all wills executed according to the laws of the domicile of the testator, if resident in the United States, and if the executor therein named is a citizen of the United States, he may propound and qualify under such will in Georgia, with power as full as in case of domestic wills, and is made subject thereafter to the jurisdiction of our courts by citation and substituted service. If the executor is a foreigner, the parties at interest may probate and execute through a local administrator c. t. a. Section 3524 is so amended as to apply solely to foreign administrators.

3d. Your Committee is of the opinion that greater restriction should be thrown around the harsh process of garnishment and attachment in order that the plaintiff may enforce a bona fide right without unnecessary or wanton injury to the defendant. With this end in view the Committee have formulated separate bills amending Sections 4511, 4514, 4518, 4550, 4556 and 4580 of the Code. These bills are attached and made a part of this report and marked Exhibits "C," "D," "E," "F." "G," and "H." For convenience these bills are epitomized as follows: "C" The power to issue attachments in excess of $100 is limited to judges of courts of record; justices of the peace are confined to claims of $100 or less. "D" The surety on the attachment bond must be a regularly licensed surety company, unless personal sureties shall be freeholders and shall qualify to a worth in excess of the amount of the bond over and above encumbrances and exemptions. The issuance of an attachment without such a bond is made ground of impeachment of the judge or magistrate, and a false affidavit by a surety as to his worth is made perjury. "E" Attachments against non-residents are required to be returned to the courts of the county in which levies are made and garnishments issued, and not to any court in the State, as now provided by law. "F" When an attachment is levied by garnishment in a county other than county wherein the attachment is returned, the clerk of the ancillary court is required to advise the primary court of the contents of the answer of the garnishee, and no judgment is allowed on said garnishment proceedings, or on any traverse of the answer thereunder. until the plaintiff has recovered judgment against the defendant in attachment and filed certified copy thereof in the court where the garnishment is pending, "G" Declarations in attachment are required to be filed within ten days from the date of the attachment and the defendant, in order to prevent default, must plead at the first term, or within twenty days of the filing of the declaration. "H" All attachments are required to be, docketed before the writ issues, docket entries to show the amount claimed in the attachment, with suitable exceptions for attachments issued on Sunday.

The Committee is of the opinion that these changes are so patent on their face that this report need not be loaded with

further explanation, and so desirable that the report need not be lengthened by argument in their favor.

4th. Your Committee has prepared an independent bill providing that all summonses of garnishment shall state in their face the amount of the claim of the plaintiff in the suit or judgment forming the basis of the garnishment, and the garnishee is relieved of all liability in that proceeding for any amount in excess of that stated in the face of the garnishment. The object of this law is to prevent the necessity for holding up of large sums of money on trivial claims. We recognize that it, in effect, repeals Section 4724 of the Code, providing for bringing a fund into court through a garnishment proceeding, but our observation and experience is that this section is, in practice, a dead letter. The bill drafted by the Committee carrying out this reform is hereto attached and marked "Exhibit I."

5th. Your Committee recommends the passage of an Act in regulation of the criminal practice in this State, providing for an issue of venue to be raised and tried separate and apart from the offense charged,-along lines parallel to the trial of the plea to the jurisdiction separate and apart from the merits in a civil case. This Act further provides for amendment of indictments, presentments and accusations in matters of form. The attention of the Committee was directed to this matter by Mr. Samuel H. Sibley, of Union Point, Georgia, and the constitutionality of the proposed Act seems to be supported by the cases of Small v. The State, 63 Ga., 386, and Brown v. The State, 109 Ga., 570. A copy of this bill is hereto attached and marked "Exhibit J."

6th. While the Committee does not feel called upon to go to the extent of previous committees relative to changing the statutory provisions for Superior Court charters, it does think that the words "actually paid in," in the sixth line of paragraph one of Section 2350, might be stricken as surplusage, as practically none of the capital stock of a corporation is paid in until its formal organization, and the minimum of 10 per cent. then required to be paid in is fixed in the third paragraph of the same section.

The length of these bills in the aggregate is so great that the Committee foregoes further comment in this report. It is hoped