Page images

vate and in a friendly manner such student; and if he shall deny on his honor as a Gentleman the offense of which it has been believed he was guilty, such denial shall be taken as conclusive evidence of his innocence.

"But in all cases when a Student or Students shall be believed to have committed an offense and shall on his Honor as a Gentleman deny it and aver his innocence, such declaration shall be taken by a Professor as conclusive proof of his innocence, because the convocation is satisfied that no Student will degrade 'himself by falsehood, and that an appeal to his Honor will never be made in vain."

Contrast with these provisions the features of the honor system prevailing at the University of Virginia, which has been so eloquent-. ly portrayed to us this evening by our distinguished guest, at Princeton, at Vanderbilt University, and at the George Washington University. The honor system is expressly defined by the constitution of the honor system at the George Washington University, was the placing of the responsibility for rectitude in examinations. upon the student body.” The constitutions of the other law schools where the honor system exists do not as a rule contain an express definition of the honor system, but their provisions make it perfectly plain that they understand it in the sense of student supervision of examinations. Each of them provides for the appointment by the student body of a committee intrusted with the enforcement of the honor system. Each imposes upon all members of the class the obligation not only to refrain from giving aid in examinations, or seeking aid, but also that of reporting to the student committee all violations of the honor system. Each finally requires the student at the end of the examination to certify that he has neither given nor received unauthorized aid of

law faculty to do all in its power to prevent such a person from being graduated. The adoption of the honor system does not relieve the faculty of its duty. If, under such a system, men who are willing to cheat in larger numbers come to the bar, the faculty cannot defend the adoption of the system on the ground that, taken as a whole, it is better for the school, or on the ground that most of the students are benefited by it.”

I wish Dean Lewis had made it plain whether he regards the system of supervision as more effective than the honor system in preventing cheating at examinations. To my mind there can be no doubt that the honor system, honestly enforced, is far more effective towards this end than that of faculty supervision. Faculty supervision may take one of two forms. In the one it is made the duty of the professor in charge of the course to see that the examination is conducted honestly. In the other monitors are intrusted with this duty. It will readily be admitted, I think, that if the desire to cheat exists the professor alone is unable to prevent its execution. Under the monitor system there may seem to be more doubt in this regard. I, for one, believe that under the monitor system there is actually more cheating than would be the case if the professor alone was in charge of the examination. From students who have been under the monitor system I know it to be a fact that good students give assistance and compare their answers during the examination, simply because they enjoy the sport of outwitting the monitors. No system, of course, will prevent cheating absolutely. But under the honor system, where the student is trusted, and where each member of the class is responsible to his class to see to it that the examination is conducted fairly, there is every incentive for the honest student to conduct himself properly. The member of the class who is morally weak will be encouraged in the right direction, while the student who is honest only from necessity will be compelled by the watchful eyes of all around him to refrain from resorting to unauthorized aid in the examination.

But it is objected: The honor system may be all right in theory, but it does not operate successfully in practice, because students will not discharge their obligation of reporting infractions of the rules. It is evident, of course, that mere schoolboys might regard such reporting as tale-bearing; but there is no danger that serious-minded men, as our law students are, will regard it in that light. All they are requested to do is to enforce the rules they have laid down for their own selfgovernment. As well might a citizen, giving notice to the proper authorities of the commission of a crime, as was pointed out by Dean Lile, be regarded as a tale-bearer.

The only question the law faculties will have to answer is whether the law students of their school are capable of self-government. If a good many of their students are

any kind.

It is clear, therefore, that in its modern sense the honor system means student supervision in the conduct of examinations instead of faculty supervision.

Sometimes it is said that the faculty has no right to shift to the student body the responsibility of seeing to it that the degree is obtained by fair means. The answer to this objection given by Dean Lile, which I heartily approve, is that if the student body is willing to assume the obligation, and the faculty is satisfied that the honor system in the institution concerned is operating with success and is eradicating cheating more effectually than any other system, its duty is fully discharged. Dean Lewis does not go so far as to say that the faculty has no right to shift its responsibility in this regard. He says:

"It is the duty of the law faculty to keep improper persons from the bar. A person who will cheat in examinations is not a fit person to be a lawyer. It is the duty of a

trifling, or if the spirit of hero-worship with one, see nothing objectionable to it. It apregard to athletes exists in the law school, pears to me, on the contrary, a wise provior there are other factors disturbing the mor- sion, because it serves to remind the students al vision, or tending to dull the sense of re- at every examination of the obligation assponsibility of a considerable portion of the sumed by them. I would advocate even the student body, the proper conditions for suc- practice prevailing at Vanderbilt University, cessful self-government, of course, do not ex- where, in addition to the blank pledge, there ist. In the better law schools of this country is printed on the first page of the examinaI have no doubt the student body may be tion book an explanation of the honor system safely trusted in the administration of the in these words: “All examinations are conhonor system. As far as the experience of ducted under the honor system. Students the different schools that have enforced the are under pledge neither to give nor receive honor system is concerned, we have the tes- assistance; they demand that this pledge timony of Dean Lile as to its successful oper- be faithfully kept by all. To this end they ation at the University of Virginia. In re- agree to report to the Student Honor Comgard to Princeton, Professor Fine has re- mittee any real or apparent violation of the marked: “It has banished cheating from our spirit or letter of this law." examinations. Before the system was in- My conclusion is, gentlemen, that, while troduced there was a great deal of cheating the honor system should not be imposed upin the Princeton examinations.” As to the on the students of any law school, its introoperation of the honor system in the Law duction should receive the hearty encourage School with which I have been connected for ment and enlist the sympathetic interest of the last six years, I may say that it has been all law faculties. an ụnqualified success. All the students with whom I have talked were convinced that J. B.

J. B. Lichtenberger, University of there was no cheating at our examinations.

Pennsylvania. During the past six years I believe two cases were actually discovered, and in each in- As a teacher of some experience in differstance the guilty student left the university. ent schools where this system has been tried,

In many law schools it may be felt that the and my college education having been receivquestion before us to-night is of no great ed at Princeton, where we had the system, practical importance, because they regard I wish to say that I took some of my examcheating as a rare occurrence in their schools. inations entirely in the same room with all In examinations based upon concrete cases, of the other students of my classes, and I in which the teacher insists upon correct rea

have also taken some of them away from soning, rather than a correct answer, it is the other members of the class; I have taken difficult in the nature of things to give or re- some of them in my own room and some in ceive real assistance. But even here, no the classroom. During the time that I was doubt, some cheating occurs. To the repre

at Princeton, where I saw some of the worksentative of such schools I would suggest ings of the honor system, and after seeing it that the honor system should properly be in effect in the University of Virginia and viewed from a larger standpoint than that other Southern schools, I became strongly of a mere device calculated to prevent cheat- impregnated with that system. In the differing at examinations, and from such a stand- ent schools with which I have been connect. 'point it has a claim upon their thoughtful ed I tried it upon my students, and while I consideration. There is no doubt that the never pressed the matter upon them with honor system, faithfully administered, will any very great vehemence, still I impressed result in the establishment of a more cordial upon them the idea of the strength of charrelationship between faculty and students acter that it developed and the responsibility than is possible where the members of the that it placed upon them and the results i faculty at times must play the role of detect- that were to be obtained from its careful and ives. As a training for life in a democratic considerate workings. After I had taught country like ours, the honor system is of the for a year or two, I came to the University greatest value, because it involves training in of Pennsylvania as a student, and at the self-government. In its effect upon the law end of the very first year the agitation came student in particular we should not forget, as up as to whether the class would adopt the was suggested by Dean Lile, that the pla- honor system at that time, which year would cing of responsibility upon the student will close in a few days. My class voted for the develop in him those moral qualities of which honor system, and as president of that class the lawyer, above all other citizens, is in I at least thought that I would most strenneed. A lawyer must be a person in whom uously insist on the system in the Univer. absolute trust and confidence may be repos- sity of Pennsylvania. This was for several ed. Any system which renders the future reasons: First, because the student body lawyer more worthy of his trust should re of the Pennsylvania Law School is furnished ceive every encouragement.

from many different schools, from almost Objection has been made to certain details every state of the United States and from of the honor system. I will speak of only all portions of the country, not from any one one, namely, the signing of the pledge. I, for college, but from many, and I felt that, as

long as these men who were not of one class, to resist temptation. That may be true, but men who were not continually associating there are certain men who are fairly strong with each other, many of them who never that find it difficult to resist the temptation met before they met in the classroom, that of looking at a paper where the answer to if they desired to adopt this system it could a question can be read. You are by this sysnot be from any public sentiment on the tem putting these men up to temptation, and part of the different members of that partic- they will do many things under the honor ular class, and I felt that it should be tested. system that they would not do under the

The honor system was tried, and I am watchful eye of some monitor whom they glad to say that it has been a success and respect. Many of you realize the effect of a benefit to all. They have accustomed placing men under a very serious temptation. themselves to the practice of detecting cheat- I claim that it is not fair to the student that ing. I have noticed myself a number of he should be subjected to this temptation, cases, and other men have done the same. without which he would not be so sorely tried, The question was brought up what to do and perhaps fall by the wayside. I claim with these men. There were one or two that no law school should adopt for their cases where it was reported of men who students the honor system unless every man knew of the cheating going on in the classes, in the school is willing to say that he will where men had given and received aid. report any cheating that he sees in the ex. Then came the fight. The second year we aminations. I glory in the University of made a stronger fight than we did the year Virginia and in the other schools of the before, and it was put up to the class to South which have such an honor system. settle. If every man would report any in- I glory in any school that can build up such fraction of the rules that he saw, then, of a sentiment; but I insist that you cannot course, it would be a straight honor system. and ought not to place upon our student I want to say that this next year there was bodies any stronger obligations than we are not nearly so much cheating as the first year, willing to take upon ourselves as members and I think that was due more or less to of our local bar. the very severe fight which we had in the classroom over this question. Last year the

E. B. Evans, Drake University Law question was up again, and I voted to leave

School. it to the law school again and let them de cide as to what should be done. We have I have been very much interested in this tried the monitor system. We had a monitor discussion from the standpoint of one who at one time who was a member of the Phil. has given the matter a great deal of thought adelphia bar, and we have had other moni. and who has been tempted year after year tors from other places close by—men who to put it into his own school. What I am were a committee, and were supposed to anxious to know is whether or not it would report if they saw any evidences of improp- be practical, or how it could be presented or er practices during the examinations.

carried out to a successful conclusion. Now, I want to ask you, gentlemen, on I realize from my own experience the imthat point, you who are members of the pro- possibility of keeping out cheating in examfession, and who are practicing lawyers inations, even though the professor himself many of you: Do you not know members of is watching and is present every moment your bar whom you realize are not compe- during the examination. I have read examtent to properly represent clients in the ination papers where, by reason of my knowlcourts? I ask you, farther, if you have ever . edge of the student that brought them, I taken a step towards going before a com- knew, although I could not prove it, that mittee of your bar who has cognizance of somewhere along the line of that examinathose matters, and make any complaints as tion he had had assistance; yet I have been to their method of practicing your profes- unable to detect it. And I know that a stusion? I will wager that none of you have dent body, one that was properly organized, ever taken a single step towards correcting when matters of this nature were brought those evils. You know that you know many before them, would be a hundredfold more practicing lawyers who are utterly unfit to potent in the discovery of such cheating represent clients Yet you will not bring than the professor himself, or than any other charges against these men and present them monitor that might be placed over the stuto your committees, and still you think that dent. it is eminently proper to adopt a system It is an embarrassing matter in our school, that forces students under its workings to because we have a number of professors report fellow members whom it sees indulg- who are engaged in actual practice—have ing in questionable practices. I claim that one member who is from the district bench, you are putting these students upon exactly and two professors who are engaged in acthe same plane that you are now occupying tual practice, and who take the early mornin relation to incompetent members of your ing hours for their lectures. These men bar. You say that by this honor system the help to make up the faculty largely through weak are made strong and they are enabled patriotic motives, and are there solely for

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

that reason. I think they are more efficient mind as to whether I am personally in favor in their instructions and are relied upon to of the adoption of this system or not, but on a greater extent than are men that come my return to my own institution I shall fresh from the Eastern law schools, or any take the matter up with my faculty and my other law schools, who have never had any students. Like Mr. Lichtenberger, I do not practical experience; but their time is limit- believe in any compromise measure. I am ed. They have no time that we can com- still of the opinion that, as the manager of mand for giving their personal attention to å national school, I will hardly be justified their examinations. They must be handled in throwing over a system that has been through a monitor. So that this question in use for years and adopting some other appeals to me because of the inefficiency of system until I am sure that I can obtain the the service of any monitor that I have ever hearty aid of all connected with the school. been able to get hold of, and who seem often I think all, before they adopt the system, to falter between their loyalty to the faculty should be able to frankly admit their ability and the men cheating.

to carry it into effect, and that, in my opin

ion, can only be accomplished where the W. G. Hastings, Dean, University of entire management of the institution is in Nebraska Law School.

full accord as to its adoption. A very few words will explain my experi- George P. Costigan, Jr., Northwestern ence in this matter. Last winter, just before the semester examinations, I was wait

University Law School. ed upon by a committee from the school I should like to add just a word to what with which I am connected, and asked if has been said by our Nebraska friend and the honor system had been adopted in con- our Southern friends. In the North we are nection with the examination about to be not personally opposed to the honor system, conducted. I asked those gentlemen if they nor are we particularly in favor of it. Like had the unanimous consent of their respec- my Nebraska friend, we are in favor of tive classes, and they said, "No." I asked making an investigation of the system, with them if they thought that I would be justi- a view of noting whether it could be adopted fied in making such a demand upon those with success in our institutions. I have who were not thoroughly conversant with talked with the different students in the the conditions, and I asked them if they school with which I am connected, in order thought that they could get the unanimous to obtain the views of the student body and consent of their classes. They expressed to ascertain whether or not, as a body, they some doubt about it. I told them I should favored the honor system. Unanimously they hesitate about adopting this system without said, "No," they would not favor it. In this knowing at least the proportion of each matter I think that perhaps a few words of class that wished the system put in force; explanation may not be amiss. In Nebraska that, furthermore, I should have no hesitan- you ought, perhaps, to know that a law decy in accepting the declaration of each of gree there admits to the bar. A student at these three classes that they wished the the Nebraska University, who would be asksystem adopted, but until I could obtain ed to report upon his fellow student whom that, and until I could reconcile my own he saw cheating in an examination, would views upon the subject, and was sure that feel just as he would were he called upon the system would be carried out, I declined to report upon him after he had been admitto take the responsibility of changing the ted to the bar. He is placed in exactly the system.

sa me situation. He is placed in the same We have had some objections to the mon- situation as he would be, were he asked to itor system in use in the school, but I think report, after he became a practicing attorthe system has been fairly successful. I ney, upon a fellow member of the bar who have no doubt but what there have been is not acting in a just way, who is not actcases of cheating, like my friend from ing in just the way that he ought to act. I Iowa has stated. I have had papers come have asked the students in regard to that, before me for the accuracy of which I could and they have said that they would not do not account upon any other theory than that it. They state that they would be perfectly there had been some assistance rendered the willing to take the pledge in regard to their student, and that he had had some special own actions, and show that there had been knowledge gained from somebody outside nothing out of the way, so far as they were of himself. It is admittedly a success in concerned themselves; but they would not many institutions, and, while the monitor agree to take the responsibility of expelling system which we use has not been entirely a fellow member of their class who had been free from objections and complaints, I have guilty of cheating. never felt, and I do not yet feel, that I am I understand that in the University of Virjustified in changing it until I am certain of ginia and at Washington & Lee the students the hearty support of something more than are willing to assume the responsibility of the main student body.

the conduct of the fellow classmen; in fact, I have not as yet conclusively made up my

they have assumed it. It is one thing to let the student body assume the responsibility, prevail. The students are not giving the exand another thing to try to impose the honor aminations. It is the University or the Law system upon a student body who refuse to School that is giving the examination. That assume the responsibility. In this connec- being so, it makes it incumbent upon the tion I should like to have some discussion body which gives the examination to really from the Southern delegates and members give them—mark them and grade them, and on this problem as it exists in several of complete their work. That is a part of the the schools, and particularly in the North- system. That is a part of the examination. western. In the Northwestern we have a It is no more a part of the examination to system whereby each student signs a pledge mark the papers than it is to put the quesat the end of an examination; but the stu- tions. The student who is in the examinadents assume no responsibility for the con- tion hall should be there for one purpose, duct of their fellow students. There is no namely, to answer the questions that have such a thing as a court of appeals in the been submitted to him. It is not fair, as I student body-no student court or committee conceive it, to put upon his shoulders the of appeal. Now, as I understand Dean Lile, additional burden of acting as a policeman we have what I regard as the true honor over the rest of the class taking the examsystem at the Northwestern; that is, a sys. ination. He should not have a burden put tem of relying upon the individual student's upon him to that extent, and have his mind honor, though the student has none of the distracted from his work by something which supervision. But, as I understand Mr. Lich- should be none of his business, as far as tenberger, we have not, according to his con- he is practically concerned. He might be ception, the true honor system, because we disgusted, he might feel outraged, by noticdo not have the student supervision in addi- ing something not proper in the conduct of tion to the student pledge. A faculty mem- a fellow student taking the examination; but ber is always present when an examination then that should be no part or parcel of takes place. He is there for the purpose of his duty, while he is engaged in the imporanswering any question that may be asked tant business of trying his best to pass the in regard to a paper, but not for any other examination. purpose. At the same time he is at liberty To my mind there is only one question to impose any regulations upon the student here, and that is whether it is to our advanbody that he sees fit, which in his own opin- tage to adopt the honor system in the variion may prevent cheating. That last resery- ous schools which we represent. It seems ed right on the part of the teacher in at- to me that we have wandered very far from tendance upon an examination, I understand, the consideration of the question, and have would be regarded by our Southern dele- gone into a discussion of questions which gates as hostile to the true honor system do not represent the honor system that was conception, and I certainly would be very so interestingly discussed by Mr. Lile. The much pleased if some of them would make question, it seems to me, is whether or not some criticism or suggest some improvement the student shall be put upon his honor, and in regard to the system which prevails at give a pledge at the end of his examination the Northwestern.

that he has neither given nor received as

sistance. I can conceive many arguments Charles T. Terry, Columbia University

in favor of such a system, but I see no mid

dle ground between that and the ordinary Law School.

method of supervision that most of the There are one or two observations which schools have been accustomed to follow. I occur to me, as I have been sitting here am not prepared to say but what a real honlistening to the discussion of this subject, or system might not be a good thing. I don't that have seemed to be somewhat confusing, presume to say whether it would result in and which seem to me to have a very im- strengthening the character of the student portant bearing on this entire question. I body or not. This is not a question of legal cannot conceive how the honor system can education, as has been raised by some of the prevail in any institution unless the faculty members; but it is a question of the conof the law school is willing to assume the duct of educational institutions. I can conresponsibility for the honesty of the exam- ceive, as I heretofore stated, of general eduinations. The responsibility for the honesty cational methods that might be adopted that of the examination is on their shoulders, and would probably strengthen the character of not on the shoulders of the students, and it the students taking the examinations. But seems to me that a different rule would pre- I see no middle ground between the real honvail than that which exists in an institution or system and following the systems that we where, so to speak, the students act as the have been accustomed to follow. policemen of the examination. It seems to me, also, that such a system as that, where J. C. Monnet, University of Oklahoma the student acts as a policeman, involves a considerable unfairness to the student, and

Law School he would be put in a different light to that There is one thing that has suggested itclass of students where that system did not self to me, while I have listened to this dis

« PreviousContinue »