« PreviousContinue »
tage. Instead of being given fragments of already solved leading cases (if, by the way, there can be said to exist more than a handful of really leading cases that have not been whittled away to nothing at all) and left to consult them, the student should be given real or hypothetical cases, the more condensed the better, especially at first, and these he should learn to solve at first hand under the guidance and direction of the trained lawyer who is assisting him in or out of the law school. To change Judge Sharswood's famous statement, it is not so hard to find the law; the real difficulty is in applying it. Imagine teaching arithmetic by giving the student a large number of solved problems to study and tell him from these to deduce the principles.
less text-books, parading as the legititate offspring of Langdell of Harvard. One word more, in which we take the liberty of dogmatizing a little. A case means to a practicing lawyer one of two things: A case is either the phenomena presented to him by his client along with his retainer, in which event it is the case as it exists in a state of nature, susceptible of solution by the application of the correct principles which underlie rules of conduct formulated by custom or legislature; or, it is the case as it exists in nature disguised, sometimes beyond the possibility of recognition in the synthesis of actual practice and more or less perfectly embalmed in the transcript of record. In no event is "the case" the opinion of the appellate tribunal, except, perhaps, in the opinion of the legitimate offspring of the casebook system, the case lawyer.
One further word, added to the above, which is intended not as an argument to exhaust at once the subject and the unwary reader, but as a suggestion only. A real case system is possible, and is followed very successfully in a few textbook schools. We have seen that to the practitioner a case is either a controversy the solution of which depends upon the correct application of legal principles to provable facts, or it is the synthesis of the various activities of the lawyer, whether as a pleader, a trial lawyer, and a careful and astute practitioner, as they are found to be grouped and co-ordinated in the transcript of record. The lawyer's first function is quasi-judicial in applying principles to facts; his second regards the technique of the profession. The student should be taught to reason for himself, to solve problems or cases. presented to him by his client; he should then be trained in the technique of the law. In both of these respects a real case system may be employed to great advan
For the technique, a properly organized and conducted moot court is the prac tical means of instruction. The absence of adequate moot court and practice work in many of our law schools is perhaps a natural consequence of the tendency to divorce legal instructions from any suspicion of fitting the graduate to practice his profession. Of course the intelligent student will survive the case system and in the end acquire a very fair foundation, and if the student body is very select the result will be in harmony with that fact; but the results to which it is usual at college commencements to point with pride are more often creditable to the student than to the system of instruction provided for him. The great "American Educational Humbug" has pretty well spared the law schools in the past. For Heaven's sake let us not tempt his appetite too far by the employment of such phrases as the "case system which induces self-activity," or by calling a law library a "laboratory for analytical and synthetical legal chemistry."
Attorney and Client.
By F. CHARLES HUME, Jr., of the Houston, Texas, Bar.
N after-dinner speech delivered at the banquet of the American Bar Association, at Seattle, Washington, August 28, 1908. This is the second time Mr. Hume has been called upon to respond to toasts at the banquets of the Association. The notable dinner speech, "The Young Lawyer," delivered at the St. Paul meeting two years ago by Mr. Hume, is still fresh in the memory of the legal profession.
Mr. Toastmaster, Brethren of the Bar,
I place no tariff on good fellowship, and no espionage over its symptoms. I recognize no necessary incompatibility in work and recreation. And if to speak on this occasion without restraint-of time or judgment-is to imperil my rightful claim to substantial professional consideration and ability, then I now, for the second time, fearlessly assume the risk of being outlawed through being
underestimated and misunderstood.
And the fact that you have been willing to forget the past and grant me another chance to sound "the call of the wild." is a tribute, not only to myself as a pub lic futility, but to your own temerity an! blind faith in my pretensions-a signal triumph of hope over experience.
My friends, you will never precisely ascertain how much, if anything, it means to me, or you, or to posterity, to address again this ponderous council of intellectual giants; the greatest lights that ever shone on land or sea. I say this to your faces, here and now, the eyes of the world upon us, without the slightest fear of contradiction; not, forsooth in idle, maudlin flattery, but be cause, loving the truth, you rejoice to hear it.
I glory in the attributes of greatness. We all do-in our own. On a former trial before this august tribunal, I established, upon my own uncorroborated testimony, my pre-eminence as a lawyera personal judgment whose validity none of you has ever attacked, or even seriously considered. As for me, it is res adjudicata; for I realize that nothing I could say to you now, in my own behalf, would add a single cubit to my profes sional stature.
I am grateful for this honor. My gentle, unsuspecting spirit accepts and indorses all compliments without recourse or misgiving. This added laurel to my resplendent brow comes as no surprise. It is usually the expected that happens when one's friends pull the wires of opportunity. For my friends, like myself, are optimists—always looking for the best of it. And therefore I am here, before this goodly company--always commending ourselves most
a lawyer among lawyers-to point a moral and adorn a feast in fatuous flights of windy suspiration.
Seldom has this coveted privilege been twice accorded an oratorical desperado.
You can not misconceive my attitude. For, my brethren, together we compose a broad-minded, sympathetic profession
highly to the public respect and confidence, giving credit wherever due and taking it wherever we can get it, "touching the community for its ennobling," and seeking not the bubble reputation
in the cannon's mouth-because we find And to-night, well met it in our own. and fancy free, we feel just a little bit better than anybody else; and to-morrow, perchance, we'll feel just a little bit
Michael Angelo, in sculpture peerless, and Richelieu, in the statecraft of his day unmatched, both signed in vain for the muse's elusive wreath wherewith to bid for fame and men's remembrance. All great men have their weaknessesmine is the law! And so, with vanity as my impulse and excuse, I shall attack with discourse wide of reason, and extinguish quite, the burning theme of "Attorney and Client" to the quenchless strains of "All Through the Night."
And now, with platitudinous tread, I start, like a guilty thing upon a fearful summons, confident that i shall leave nothing to be desired-from me ever again.
There subsists in the knowledge of men no more delightful relation than that of attorney and client. And there is none, in my experience-save matrimony-more difficult of establishment. Attorney and client
How flat and stridulous doth roll the jejune sound;
And yet, perpend, what reach of soul abideth there!
O! blest relation, concord of sweet hopes!
O! synchronism pulchritudinous!
O! epithets that passeth understanding!
And hover o'er us still, and speed
When all men clients shall have come to be
Save only us that need them!
Throughout the law the one increasing purpose runs, to lead to justice.
And to our profession is entrusted the commission to control, according to law, the tide of human affairs, to preserve the legal status of men, to hearken to "the still sad music of humanity," to voice the spirit of truth, and silence falsehood, enforcing right, redressing wrong, fearing God and no man.
The fault is not in our profession, but in ourselves, if we be underlings. The attorney is more or vastly less. His title imports integrity and conscientious fidelity. Within the terms alone of honorable professional engagement he represents and stands for the client's interest. But he is not the client, not even his own client-except in cases more to be pitied than cited. Nor is he the keeper of the client's general conscience, nor his guardian at large, nor his hireling, nor the impresario of his social aspirations.
Notwithstanding sinister gibes to the contrary of those that have unwisely and in vain sought the solace of the law -with the attorney the fee is not the thing. It does not obsess the legal mind. While it is not always incompetent, immaterial, and irrelevant, still it is rarely the gist of the action-as it very rarely should be. Nothing could be more repugnant to the lawyer than to regard his profession purely as a source of wealth, and nothing could be more disappointing.
Yet the principle of compensation, according to Emerson, pervades the universe; and we know that ours is a profession of principle. And we are constrained to accept the fee as an incident to the practice out of deference to the general welfare clause in our constitution, realizing that the professional organism cannot adequately discharge its vital functions to society without occasional stimulation of the "pocket nerve."