Assets on Death, and Partnership; (4) Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure, and Civil Procedure and Evidence. Thus, after a period of altogether eight months' study, this gentleman was supposed to have acquired some substantial knowledge of Roman Law and Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law and Legal History, English Law (including Equity), Civil Procedure (including Evidence) and Criminal Law and Procedure. And in two short months of these eight months he was supposed to have acquired a knowledge of the English Law sufficient to entitle him to practice it as a profession. curriculum, I desire to mention that students have complained to me that the lectures, whether in the lecture-room or in the class-room, are sometimes essays merely, and frequently above their heads. They say, that, when the lecturer is speaking of legal documents, examples of the actual things are not put before them, and they fail to realize them. They say the classes are not sufficiently catechetical, and that when the lecturer has delivered himself he disappears, and is not available for advice and assistance from day to day in moments of doubt and difficulty. It is certain, if these complaints are well These gentlemen were both gentlemen of intelli-founded, that they point to serious defects in our gence, and gifted with remarkable powers of methods of instruction. memory. They had not mastered the Law, but what they had done was, under the skillful direction of the coach, to learn the answer to a large proportion of the questions which the previous experience of the coach enabled him to say would probably be put in the various papers. In the latter of the two cases, the student was assured that he had answered properly more than three-fourths of the questions put; but he candidly confessed that he could not answer them now, that they had faded from his memory, and probably the most that this so-called legal training has done for him is to familiarize him with the books in which he may find the information useful to him, when he comes to the actual practice of his profession. It may, of course, be urged that the crammer is a difficulty in any system where examination is made the test. That is so, and hence the suggestion arises whether a better or some additional guarantee of learning may not be secured by some other method. Compare our legal system with the elaborate care and training in the medical and surgical schools. As has recently been well said by Sir Edwin Arnold, the labors of educational preparation for these professions grow, year by year, harder and harder and so they ought. To be up to the high-water mark of proficiency, a young doctor must to-day be a chemist, physiologist, botanist, mechanician, and many things besides. Indeed, the history of medical education in recent years, from the time when the College of Physicians and the College of Surgeons commanded the principal avenues to the profession to the changes wrought by the legislation of 1858 and 1886, affords an instructive example of the improvements that may be effected under a body such as the General Medical Council clothed with public responsibility, and broadly representative in its character. It shows also how university teaching may be utilized, even in a profession in which a large part of the needful training is highly technical, practical and experimental. On the whole, therefore, is their not reason to think that our system of education is not satisfactory, that it is not thorough, that it does not supply any real test of adequate knowledge, that we are in too great a hurry to manufacture barristers, and that by this course we are neither recognizing our responsibilities to the public nor the true interests and dignity of the profession of the law? I do not profess to be competent to lay down the lines of a proper and adequate system, but I am satisfied that we shall never have such a system until legal education is placed under the control of an authority differently constituted from that which now exists, and I shall only make such further demands upon your patients as will enable me to justify this view, and to suggest for your consideration the constitution of such an authority as might fitly be entrusted with this great work. What are the objections to the Council of Legal Education? To begin, it is the creation of the concerted action of the four Inns of Court, and, therefore, the dissentient action of any one of them might undo it, though I admit this is not a probable contingency. Its powers are limited. It has not a free hand. Although it has now powers of initiative, that initiative may at any moment be checked by any one of the Inns of Court. It is composed solely of benchers of the Inns. This I conceive to be a grave defect. It is composed of men of advanced age-of men already fully burthened with the weight of professional and judicial work. Why should not the zeal and energy of younger men be utilized? Aye, and of men outside the profession of the law, if they are able to bring useful experience with them? Again, why are solicitors and students in that branch of the profession excluded? Down to the middle of the sixteenth century all members of, and students for, either branch of our common profession were alike part and parcel of the Inns of Court. I have never understood how the solicitors were then properly excluded. The lines of study of the two branches must be, to a large extent, similar. Why should Before leaving the subject of the existing legal they be kept apart? Their separation is a waste of power and a loss of advantage to both. This was so far back as 1846 pointed out as a grave evil by the Commons' Committee Report of that year. Some, I understand, advocate the separation as a barrier against fusion. I do not advocate fusion, nor do I believe in the probability of its occurrence, on the ground, mainly, that the distinction between the branches is the result, not of an arbitrary superimposed ordinance, but of a division gradually evolved because of its supposed convenience and utility. In America the distinction really, though not nominally, exists to a large extent. See the enormous gain to the cause of legal education from the junction of the two branches. With increase of numbers comes increase of emulation amongst the students, and consequent incitement to the teachers to put out their best efforts, which the chilling influence of sparse attendance at lecture or in class will not bring forth. Have the Inns' lectures, even under the improved system, been a success? Look at the attendance, In 1892, only 582, whilst in 1893 the number had fallen to 460, and in 1894, to 384. But since the Council of Legal Educational has secured freedom of admission to the public to all the lectures (all credit to them for it) it would seem to be impossible even if it were desirable which, in my opinion, it is not to keep up the separation. A word as to the teaching staff. I say nothing to their disparagement. Far from it. I have no doubt they are able men, but many of them are men with whom teaching is not the business of, but only an incident in, their professional lives. For a large class of subjects which must be taught, for example, Jurisprudence, Roman and Constitutional Law and Legal History, International Law and Comparative Law, we want a professional class of teachers; and we must make it worth the while of able men to devote themselves to such teaching as a calling. This class we cannot hope to have, without being in a position to offer adequate reward and security of tenure, and these in turn we cannot give unless and until the system of legal education is under a body of men permanently constituted, so as to command the confidence of the public and the profession, a body invested with adequate powers clothed with public responsibility and amply endowed. One other word as to the teaching staff. If we cannot at once get here all the right men we want for the work, we must look for them elsewhere, even if we have to go far afield for them. No narrow insular spirit should interfere with the selection of the best men. Athens did not repel the master of Socrates because he hailed from the coast of Ionia, nor Aristotle, because Stagira was his birth-place. | The most famous schools of the European continent derived their fame from the genius of the Alcuins of England and the Clements of Ireland, and in our time the New World has had the wisdom in the colleges and universities to utilize the trained experience gained in the colleges and universities of the Old World. I do not doubt that we have amongst us the right stuff for the work, if we proceed in the right way to bring it forth and to utilize it. It will then be asked, "What do you propose?" I answer first, in general terms, that I desire to see legal education placed under a body permanent in its character, not purely legal in its composition, which shall be in close touch and sympathy with the Inns of Court, but shall not be governed by them-a body with public responsibility, which shall be free to call to its aid, from any quarter inside or outside the profession, men whose experience and attainments best fit them for the work of legal education. INNS OF COURT SCHOOL OF LAW SUGGESTED. How is such a body to be brought into existence? Two schemes have been suggested. One is that in connection with a teaching university in London there should be founded a Faculty of Law to be en dowed by the Inns of Court. In reference to this scheme, it is, perhaps, at this time enough to say that there is not at present any teaching university in London in connection with which such a faculty could be founded, and the scheme which I propound would not prevent such a connection being established should that course hereafter appear desirable. My proposition is that a royal charter should be obtained to establish a school of law, to be called, say, "The Inns of Court School of Law." The senate, or governing body should consist of, say, thirty members, teu to be nominated by the Inns of Court, ten by the crown, one each by the lord chancellor, the lord chief justice, and master of the rolls, one each by the four universities of Oxford, Cambridge, London, and Victoria, and three by the Incorporated Law Society. These figures are merely suggestions. Personally, I should desire to have some of the governing body elected by the free voice of the profession as a whole. I should not limit the representatives of the Inns of Court or of the Incorporated Law Society to members of their own bodies respectively. In this way, coupled with the nominating power of the crown and of the universities, security would be had against that narrowness which, in spite of ourselves, has a tendency to creep into purely professional associations. I attach importance to the universities being directly represented on the governing body, because (amongst other reasons) it would render it easier, and with safety, to determine what degrees and what testamurs might properly be accepted in the case of university students and graduates, and it would tend towards es 1 tablishing that connection of legal education with university training which, with advantage, largely prevails in other countries, but is almost wholly wanting in our own. I should confer on such a body the power of granting academic distinctions, and I should commit to it in fullest confidence the settling of a scheme of peliminary examination, of systematic instruction, and of final tests of fitness for the profession of the law. A difference would, no doubt, have to be made between Bar students and others. But that is a matter of detail. I think such a scheme, well considered in all its parts, ought to receive the sanction of the Inns of Court, and would receive the warm support of the profession generally. It continues the name of the Inns of Court as it ought to be continued-in connection with the cause of legal education. The new creation would be, in effect, their child. On the governing body their voice would be powerful, and to the Inns of Court, I need hardly say, we must mainly look for the funds to carry on the work in worthy fashion. The Inns of Court--to their credit, be it said-have never shown a spirit of parsimony. On the existing system the annual expenditure amounts to some £7,000. If the lectures and classes are made attrac. tive, I doubt whether any larger sum, or, at all events, any substantially larger sum, would be required to work the scheme which I advocate. I have said that to this body I would confidently entrust the work of education. To the Inns of Court I should still leave untouched, in all their fulness, those functions of discipline, those powers of calling or refusing to call, and of disbarring, which they have hitherto exercised with honor to themselves and with advantage to the public and to the profession. To the incorporated Law Society, in like manner, I should leave untouched such anal ogous authority as they now possess. The pith and substance, then, of what I have to urge is the necessity for establishing a school of law. To the governing body of that school of law will fall the working out of a wise and comprehensive system. and which, probably, may usefully occupy those earlier years of professional life when professional work is insufficient for full oceupation. I have now done. I feel how perfunctory my treatment of this great subject has been, for a great subject it undoubtedly is. I shall be content, if to earnest minds inside the profession and outside it (for it is not merely a professional question), I have said enough to inspire the conviction that the effort ought now to be made to end a state of things certainly not creditable to the profession of the law, and surely disadvantageous to the community. Never at any time, in any State, has there existed such a conjunction of circumstances as marks London pre-eminently to-day as the seat of a great school of law. We are here at the very heart of things, where the pulse of dominion beats strongest, with a population larger than that of many kingdoms-a great center of commerce, of art and of literature, with countless libraries, the rich depository of ancient records, and the seat at once of the higher judiciary, of Parliament and of the sovereign. From this point is governed the greatest empire the world has known. From our midst go forth to the uttermost ends of the earth, not merely those who symbolize the majesty of power, but happily with them, those who represent the majesty of Law - Law, without which power is but tyranny. It has been well and truly said that there is hardly any system of civilized law which does not govern the legal relations of the queen's subjects in some portion of the empire. In parts of Canada, French law, older than the first empire, modified by modern codification, prevails in other law modified by home legislation in those self-govparts, the English system; in Australia, English erning communities; in parts of Africa, Roman law with Dutch modifications; in the West Indian colonies, Spanish law modified by local customs; in India, now the Hindoo, now the Mahommedan law, tempered by local custom and by local and imperial legislation. If the empire of our arms is wide, so, happily, is the empire of our law. For this wide and varied field, the ultimate legal court of appeal is the judicial committee of the privy council. Before that tribunal the bar of England aspire to practice, and on its benches aspire to sit. A word of warning is perhaps hardly needed, but I will utter it. However perfect the system, its fruition must mainly depend upon the energy and intelligence of the student. After all, the main function of teaching is to teach men how to think, to give them a grasp of principle, to put them on the right track, to give them a clue to the labyrinth, to inspire them with enthusiasm for the profession, that they may work with a will, inspired by a lofty idea of the dignity of the profession of the law, of its duties and of its responsibilities. Nor will any system dispense with the need of practical study in the chambers of a working law-flock, and from which shall go forth men to pracyer, which, however, may well (in the case of stu- tice, to teach, and to administer the law with a dents for the bar), be postponed to a later stage, true and high ideal of the dignity of their mission? Surely these facts suggest great possibilities and that, even in our day and generation, there may great responsibilities. Is it an idle dream to hope here arise a great school of law worthy of our time worthy of one of the first and noblest of human sciences, to which, attracted by the fame of its teaching, students from all parts of the world may power and a loss of advantage to both. This was so far back as 1846 pointed out as a grave evil by the Commons' Committee Report of that year. Some, I understand, advocate the separation as a barrier against fusion. I do not advocate fusion, nor do I believe in the probability of its occurrence, on the ground, mainly, that the distinction between the branches is the result, not of an arbitrary superimposed ordinance, but of a division gradually evolved because of its supposed convenience and utility. In America the distinction really, though not nominally, exists to a large extent. See the enormous gain to the cause of legal education from the junction of the two branches. With increase of numbers comes increase of emulation amongst the students, and consequent incitement to the teachers to put out their best efforts, which the chilling influence of sparse attendance at lecture or in class will not bring forth. Have the Inns' lectures, even under the improved system, been a success? Look at the attendance, In 1892, only 582, whilst in 1893 the number had fallen to 460, and in 1894, to 384. But since the Council of Legal Educational has secured freedom of admission to the public to all the lectures (all credit to them for it) it would seem to be impossible even if it were desirable — which, in my opinion, it is not to keep up the separation. A word as to the teaching staff. I say nothing to their disparagement. Far from it. I have no doubt they are able men, but many of them are men with whom teaching is not the business of, but only an incident in, their professional lives. For a large class of subjects which must be taught, for example, Jurisprudence, Roman and Constitutional Law and Legal History, International Law and Comparative Law, we want a professional class of teachers; and we must make it worth the while of able men to devote themselves to such teaching as a calling. This class we cannot hope to have, without being in a position to offer adequate reward and security of tenure, and these in turn we cannot give unless and until the system of legal education is under a body of men permanently constituted, so as to command the confidence of the public and the profession, a body invested with adequate powers clothed with public responsibility and amply endowed. One other word as to the teaching staff. If we cannot at once get here all the right men we want for the work, we must look for them elsewhere, even if we have to go far afield for them. No narrow insular spirit should interfere with the selection of the best men. Athens did not repel the master of Socrates because he hailed from the coast of Ionia, nor Aristotle, because Stagira was his birth-place. The most famous schools of the European continent derived their fame from the genius of the Alcuins of England and the Clements of Ireland, and in our time the New World has had the wisdom in the colleges and universities to utilize the trained experience gained in the colleges and universities of the Old World. I do not doubt that we have amongst us the right stuff for the work, if we proceed in the right way to bring it forth and to utilize it. " It will then be asked, "What do you propose? I answer first, in general terms, that I desire to see legal education placed under a body permanent in its character, not purely legal in its composition, which shall be in close touch and sympathy with the Inns of Court, but shall not be governed by them-a body with public responsibility, which shall be free to call to its aid, from any quarter inside or outside the profession, men whose experience and attainments best fit them for the work of legal education. INNS OF COURT SCHOOL OF LAW SUGGESTED. How is such a body to be brought into existence? Two schemes have been suggested. One is that in connection with a teaching university in London there should be founded a Faculty of Law to be en dowed by the Inns of Court. In reference to this scheme, it is, perhaps, at this time enough to say that there is not at present any teaching university in London in connection with which such a faculty could be founded, and the scheme which I propound would not prevent such a connection being established should that course hereafter appear desirable. My proposition is that a royal charter should be obtained to establish a school of law, to be called, say, "The Inns of Court School of Law." The senate, or governing body should consist of, say, thirty members, ten to be nominated by the Inns of Court, ten by the crown, one each by the lord chancellor, the lord chief justice, and master of the rolls, one each by the four universities of Oxford, Cambridge, London, and Victoria, and three by the Incorporated Law Society. These figures are merely suggestions. Personally, I should desire to have some of the governing body elected by the free voice of the profession as a whole. I should not limit the representatives of the Inns of Court or of the Incorporated Law Society to members of their own bodies respectively. In this way, coupled with the nominating power of the crown and of the universities, security would be had against that narrowness which, in spite of ourselves, has a tendency to creep into purely professional associations. I attach importance to the universities being directly represented on the governing body, because (amongst other reasons) it would render it easier, and with safety, to determine what degrees and what testamurs might properly be accepted in the case of university students and graduates, and it would tend towards es tablishing that connection of legal education with university training which, with advantage, largely prevails in other countries, but is almost wholly wanting in our own. I should confer on such a body the power of granting academic distinctions, and I should commit to it in fullest confidence the settling of a scheme of peliminary examination, of systematic instruction, and of final tests of fitness for the profession of the law. A difference would, no doubt, have to be made between Bar students and others. But that is a matter of detail. Ithink such a scheme, well considered in all its parts, ought to receive the sanction of the Inns of Court, and would receive the warm support of the profession generally. It continues the name of the Inns of Court as it ought to be continued-in connection with the cause of legal education. The new creation would be, in effect, their child. On the governing body their voice would be powerful, and to the Inns of Court, I need hardly say, we must mainly look for the funds to carry on the work in worthy fashion, The Inns of Court--to their credit, be it said-have never shown a spirit of parsimony. On the existing system the annual expenditure amounts to some £7,000. If the lectures and classes are made attrac. tive, I doubt whether any larger sum, or, at all events, any substantially larger sum, would be required to work the scheme which I advocate. I have said that to this body I would confidently entrust the work of education. To the Inns of Court I should still leave untouched, in all their fulness, those functions of discipline, those powers of calling or refusing to call, and of disbarring, which they have hitherto exercised with honor to themselves and with advantage to the public and to the profession. To the incorporated Law Society, in like manner, I should leave untouched such anal ogous authority as they now possess. The pith and substance, then, of what I have to urge is the necessity for establishing a school of law. To the governing body of that school of law will fall the working out of a wise and comprehensive system. A word of warning is perhaps hardly needed, but I will utter it. However perfect the system, its fruition must mainly depend upon the energy and intelligence of the student. After all, the main function of teaching is to teach men how to think, to give them a grasp of principle, to put them on the right track, to give them a clue to the labyrinth, to inspire them with enthusiasm for the pro and which, probably, may usefully occupy those earlier years of professional life when professional work is insufficient for full oceupation. I have now done. I feel how perfunctory my treatment, of this great subject has been, for a great subject it undoubtedly is. I shall be content, if to earnest minds inside the profession and outside it (for it is not merely a professional question), I have said enough to inspire the conviction that the effort ought now to be made to end a state of things certainly not creditable to the profession of the law, and surely disadvantageous to the community. Never at any time, in any State, has there existed such a conjunction of circumstances as marks London pre-eminently to-day as the seat of a great school of law. We are here at the very heart of things, where the pulse of dominion beats strongest, with a population larger than that of many kingdoms-a great center of commerce, of art and of literature, with countless libraries, the rich depository of ancient records, and the seat at once of the higher judiciary, of Parliament and of the sovereign. From this point is governed the greatest empire the world has known. From our midst go forth to the uttermost ends of the earth, not merely those who symbolize the majesty of power, but happily with them, those who represent the majesty of Law Law, without which power is but tyranny. It has been well and truly said that there is hardly any system of civilized law which does not govern the legal relations of the queen's subjects in some portion of the empire. In parts of Canada, French law, older than the first empire, modified by modern codification, prevails in other parts, the English system; in Australia, English law modified by home legislation in those self-governing communities; in parts of Africa, Roman law with Dutch modifications; in the West Indian col onies, Spanish law modified by local customs; in India, now the Hindoo, now the Mahommedan law, tempered by local custom and by local and imperial legislation. If the empire of our arms is wide, so, happily, is the empire of our law. For this wide and varied field, the ultimate legal court of appeal is the judicial committee of the privy council. Before that tribunal the bar of England aspire to practice, and on its benches aspire to sit. Surely these facts suggest great possibilities and great responsibilities. Is it an idle dream to hope here arise a great school of law worthy of our time that, even in our day and generation, there may sciences, to which, attracted by the fame of its worthy of one of the first and noblest of human teaching, students from all parts of the world may fession, that they may work with a will, inspired by a lofty idea of the dignity of the profession of the law, of its duties and of its responsibilities. Nor will any system dispense with the need of practical study in the chambers of a working law-flock, and from which shall go forth men to pracyer, which, however, may well (in the case of students for the bar), be postponed to a later stage, tice, to teach, and to administer the law with a true and high ideal of the dignity of their mission? |