might never leave her bed, and would not be likely to live six months. At a subsequent term a case was on trial wherein an attorney had sued her for talking with him about her injuries. She was apparently weli, and the Court was so astonished by her recovery that proceedings were interrupted until it could assure itself of her identity. The appointment of experts by the Court had failed to overcome the natural, the inevitable infirmities of opinion evidence. The eminent surgeons had given their opinions, enlightened by years of research and experience, but time had again proven the utter fallability of all human wisdom. Many of the ablest lawyers, including Chief Justice Joel Parker, have thought the selection of medical experts by the Court instead of the parties would "interfere with the fundamental and constitutional right of a litigant to summon and appoint anyone he sees fit in behalf of his cause." Judge Forster, in an address before the New Hampshire Medical Association in 1897, declared he was "unable to discover any answer to this objection," and, after reviewing the criticisms of the present system, concluded these were "much exaggerated and to a great extent imaginary; that they are not to be cured by any remedy that has been or seems likely to be devised, and that, on the whole, it is best to let well enough alone.".

Gustav A. Enrich, in a paper read before the Pennsylvania Bar Association last year, deplored the want of confidence in expert testimony, and thus summarized the proposed remedies: (1) The formulation of a stricter definition of expert capacity. (2) The reasonable limitation of the number of experts to be called in any case. (3) The designation of such experts by the Court upon nomination by the parties. (4) The abolition of the hypothetical question. (5) The summoning by the trial judge of an expert of his own choice to serve as assessor, or as a witness to review the expert testimony already in, or as both. (6) The payment of expert witnesses out of the public treasury, at least in the first instance. Other schemes have been suggested, such as the establishment of a separate tribunal composed of experts, to which all questions purely scientific shall be referred. Prof. Ordronaux has even gone so far as to say that "the expert should be regarded as an amicus curiae, whose opinion should be regarded as a conclusive judgment." During many years efforts have been made to foist these various alleged reforms on the profession and people through the legislatures of different states, but uniformly without success. The practical men of those bodies have observed that nearly all of them have for their purpose to dignify the expert rather than the truth. Anything which tends to close the avenues of legitimate investigation, to prevent free and untrammeled inquiry, or to treat men on the witness stand in any other light than as witnesses, may be safely put down as inimical to the fair administration of justice. The inherent defects in opinion evidence can never be obviated by merely changing the methods of procuring it. This can only be done by perfecting human wisdom. So long as men of learning and skill differ in opinion concerning matters of science upon which Courts must pass, the interest of truth demands that the opposing

conclusions be elucidated by those in sympathy with them; and any system which has for its object, open or concealed, the smothering of such differences may well be looked upon with suspicion. I am satisfied the present procedure is better adapted to the ascertainment of the truth than any of the schemes proposed. With the "broad latitude of examination and cross-examination, in which the. Court frequently participates, and the liberty which is usually given a scientific witness for explanation and illustration, ordinary men are quite capable of forming a trustworthy conclusion."

REPORT OF

Committee on Legal Biography.

MR. PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN OF THE IOWA BAR ASSOCIATION:

The temporary Committee on Legal Biography report the death of Iowa lawyers named below:

F. E. Allen, of Estherville.

J. W. Barnhart, of Logan.

Henry E. J. Boardman, of Marshalltown.

Joe A. Edwards, of Iowa City.

James H. Feenan, of Marengo.

Frank M. Goodykoontz, formerly of Mason City.

William Cowles James, of Council Bluffs.

Masten H. Jones, of Bloomfield.

William Leonard Joy, of Sioux City.

Stephen M. Marsh, of Sioux City.

John S. Monk, formerly of Onawa.

R. G. Phelps, of Atlantic.

James H. Rothrock, of Cedar Rapids.

Charles A. L. Rozell, of Clarksville.

J. L. Sheean, of Anamosa.

Francis Springer, of Columbus Junction.

Geo. R. Willett, of Decorah.

The committee herewith present such such biographical sketches as have been furnished, and ask leave to add such further sketches as may be furnished before publication of proceedings of this meeting.

FRANCIS EDWARD ALLEN.

On the 18th day of January, 1899, Francis Edward Allen, member of the law firm of Soper, Allen & Alexander, of Estherville and Emmetsburg, died at his home in Estherville, after a long and painful illness.

The subject of this sketch was born at Maumee, Lucas county, Ohio, February 20, 1850. His parents were John C. Allen and Nancy Kirtland Allen, the latter of whom, together with two children, Francis Edward, Jr., and Donald G., survive him. He received his education in the public schools of his native town and at Oberlin College. He began life as a clerk in his father's store, and later occupied a similar position in the store of David Fessler, and afterwards in the store of D. M. Crosby, at Fort Dodge, Iowa.

In the summer of 1871 he came to Estherville and engaged in mercantile pursuits. In 1873 he was elected to the position of Auditor of Emmet county, which office he filled with great acceptability to the people of the county for one term. Before the end of his term as Auditor he entered the law office of E. B. Soper, then, as now, one of the leading lawyers of Northwest Iowa, and entered upon the study of law. He was admitted to the bar in 1876, when a partnership was formed between him and Mr. Soper, under the firm name of Soper & Allen, which partnership continued until the day of his death. The firm has been successful, and in addition to a large practice that was conducted by it in Emmet and adjoining counties, has been engaged in numerous enterprises of more or less importance, all of which has been happily successful. For a number of years, although his business interests had prevented him taking an active part in the legal business of the firm, he held the appointment as local, attorney for the B., C. R. & N. Railway, which railroad had one of its divisions at Estherville, which appointment he held at the time of his death. In 1894 he was appointed by the Federal Court receiver for the American Investment Company, of Emmetsburg, one of the largest, and at one time, one of the most successful real estate and investment corporations in the Northwest, having a capital stock of nearly $1,000,000. The matter of winding up the affairs of this extensive concern was successfully and skillfully performed by him, while at the same time he was filling the position of president of two or three banking institutions, the management of which was in his hands, as well as superintending the legal business of the firm at Estherville and looking after the large real estate interests of the firm of Soper & Allen in Iowa, South Dakota and the Northwest.

Mr. Allen possessed an excellent legal mind, but on account of his