it not almost universal and always pernicious to measure nearly everything by money? From the time that a child can toddle, but does not know even the differences in the values of coin, do we not teach that money is reward and its deprivation punishment? Do not our children have every reason to believe that the acquisition of wealth is more important than the development of virtues? Is not success most frequently gauged by the amount of wealth accumulated? Do not our people sacrifice most for wealth? Its pursuit as an end leads to selfishness, sordidness, and an utter disregard of the right of the other fellow to his share. That more than all else, leads to the tyrannous deprivation of the many by the few. It leads to that menace to our government and people which at times is manifest in the ruthless combination of the money power which would, at the price of suffering millions, add more to its venal hoards, and at times in the no less ruthless and selfish combination of certain branches of labor, who would, under the threat of a starving country and at the cost of an unfair division with other labor, take more than its share.

Can we not then really serve by assisting in the establishment of truer values-by practice and precept showing that, while an honest competence is well within the scope of one's privilege and even duty to acquire, worship of wealth means the destruction of spirituality and the loss of the highest and purest pleasures.

Unworthy is he and blind to his country's good who is not in keenest sympathy with every reasonable effort to improve the rewards and comforts and happiness of the toiling multitudes. Indeed, we must all agree that democracy is a failure if it does not solicitously and wisely care for them. But in our sympathy do not let us hesitate to condemn principles and practices that must bring disaster. The Procrustean rule that fixes mediocrity or less as the maximum of accomplishment, that limits not only hours and wage, but output, is death to enterprise, efficiency, and ambition, and makes impossible survival against even tolerable competition. The rantings of some of the so-called labor leaders would have us believe that work is a humiliation and that the summum bonum of human endeavor is slothful ease. That hours of

labor have been and in many cases now are too long and under conditions too severe, the least sympathetic of us must admit, and when such conditions result from the inhumanity of the manager whose interested eye is only on the dividend sheet, our utter condemnation should find voice. But do not let the nobility of work be besmirched. Do not let the knowledge fail that selfishness as well as duty calls for work-honest work from every one, whether it be with brain or brawn. Impress this truth so strongly told by Justice Bleckley, even while broken down by overwork:

"Bliss of time is bliss of toil;

No other bliss from sun and soil

Does God permit to grow."

And, if happiness is to be sought asleep as well as awake, recall that "Weariness can snore upon a flint when resty sloth finds the downy pillow hard."

I doubt if there is as general culpability in the performance of any civic duty as in the selection of our public officers. How many of us can present anything like an approximately fair record in the performance of such service. And it is to be feared that this dereliction arises not from any misconception of our duty or inability to perform it, but most frequently from inertia and indifference, and sometimes, alas, by reason of selfish ends where the public good is sacrificed to personal advantage. And what class of citizens can do more to correct this than we lawyers. As students of law, we must know more than most persons of the theories of government, and in its practices we have innumerable opportunities to learn of the efficiency or weakness of its administration. Don't you know that if every lawyer in this State had for some years past applied his best efforts to ascertain who were the best and bravest men to fill the positions of sheriffs and judges, and had then striven vigorously to help elect them; had made it known throughout the communities that brave, fair, faithful conduct of the office would win the unvarying and certain support of at least such portion of the community, we would have been spared most, if not all, of those dreadful, horrible, spectacles which must ever bring the blush of shame to the cheek of every genuine patriot. I, and I doubt not you, have

known of these officers shamelessly disregarding their solemnly sworn duty to uphold the law and demeaning themselves with every appearance of abject cowardice. It was not bullets they feared, but ballots. And these failures in democratic government are attributable ultimately to the electors, and such failures will ever continue so long as the electorate is controlled by chicanery or demagogy taking advantage of plastic indifference, and not by earnest, honest, persistent endeavor to learn who will make the best officer, and by a bold uncompromising determination that such worthy officer shall be elected. Let our electors, with unflagging patience and diligence strive to know the truth of all issues and the merits of all candidates, and let them with pulsing patriotism, without reck of selfish gain or loss, support the wise and virtuous, and with no less courage combat the foolish and vicious, and democracy will have progressed far in meriting all the encomiums and loyalty that have been bestowed on it. Such duty no elector can escape. He cannot shift it. In its performance he must be a patriot or a slacker. Which choose ye?

The noblest claim of our profession is that we are Ministers of Justice, and when we have to our uttermost lived up to that we have added grandeur to our profession and made of law a living light. Such accomplishment is the fruition of the highest virtues. Its spectacular exhibition is in forensic contests, when rights are to be maintained against prejudice, power, unpopularity, and even violence; but it is no less grand when in the quietude of the office the rich and powerful who seek to accomplish wrong and selfish ends by means of riches and power are met with "Thou shalt not"; or, in the more appealing case when the maimed and afflicted would alter and falsify the facts that money may be wrongly got, a like denial is met. Our ears are oft offended by the criticism that this virtue is in theory only, and its claim is only another evidence of our hypocrisy. Our critics do not know that we make no parade of this practice; that in many cases it would be presumptuous for us to undertake alone the determination of what is just; and that our duty is done when, whatever the result, we have conscientiously and faithfully done our part in having the consummation in accord with justice. And I

1

1

fear not to affirm to you who know that, however much we may fail, that at least is our ambition, and thus with consecration we would serve.

Most oft, perforce, must our aid to justice be between individuals and not classes. But that service, the accomplishment of that ideal, has contributed and will contribute inestimably to the development and perfection of that splendid, noble, democratic, ideal-justice between classes. This gripping and growing principle appeals with overwhelming force; it presages the coalescing and unification of our diverse citizenry with their multitudinous occupations and conditions; it is the most auspicious hope for the permanent success of democracy. It is truly good to know that more and more are our people concerned about the rights of their fellows; that more and more certainly does scorn and contumely attend him who seeks excuse by the selfish cry: "Am I my brother's keeper?"

Does not this make an irresistible appeal to the best that is in us? Can we in any way do more to make the preservation of democracy worth while than to strive with patience, labor with gentleness, and, if need be, fight with devotion to see that our laws are so framed and administered that every man shall be rewarded according to his merits? Not that every man shall have the same. That would be the rankest injustice. Nor is it sufficient to establish a "fair field and no favor," for in the wisdom of God the rule of inequality is in effect throughout the universe, and men are unlike in their abilities and opportunities. The weak, in fairness, is entitled to our help, and the strong should not be restive under constraint. Wisdom will not always attend us and differences will of certainty exist; but if we let unselfishness be our guide, justice our passion, and love our light, and will consecrate ourselves to this service with the deathless devotion we would serve in defense of our country, we will give to social justice a new meaning, we will make the sacrifices for democracy worth while, and we will enlist countless members for endless service under that banner whose inscription will carry the lesson that however splendid and glorious is patriotism in war, not less so is— patriotism in peace.

THE SUPREME COURT AND THE TREATY.

MAKING POWER.

ANNUAL ADDRESS BY

HENRY ST. GEORGE TUCKER,

OF LEXINGTON, VIRGINIA.

Mr. President, Gentlemen of the Georgia Bar Association, the Lady Member of the Georgia Bar Association, Ladies and Gentlemen:

I have come to you, with a message on a subject I fear not entertaining but important, not interesting but serious: "The Supreme Court and the Treaty-Making Power." I have selected this subject, because there is abroad in the land a School of Thought, which makes the broad claim that the Treaty-Making Power under our Government is superior to practically all the other powers in the Constitution; that when the Treaty Power is called into action, we have, in effect, no States; this is the broad doctrine laid down.

I take issue with that position. Let me illustrate: suppose for instance a treaty is entered into between France and this country, by which the citizens of France are permitted to do business in America, wholesale and retail, and the citizens of America are permitted to do business in France reciprocally. Now the claim is that that treaty is superior to all the laws of the States in the Union. A Frenchman arrives at Savannah; he is most probably pleased with Savannah, and he looks around, and finds that Savannah is very "dry." (Applause.) He thinks there is a chance for business. He does not know the real facts (Applause), but he thinks there is a chance to do business. He goes around, and fits up a gorgeous barroom, beautifully arranged, and he is selling his wares, merchandise, goods, etc. The sergeant of the city takes him at once before Judge Meldrim. His plea is: "There is a treaty be