Northwestern College of Law - Norwester Yearbook (Portland, OR)

Page 20 text:

' .gif f ij' , 'l r l 'Q both have a rule and liberty to break that rule whenever it seems to work a hardship. What has been the result of this conflict between certainty and indi- vidual justice? It has suggested that the rules established by the courts are but the formulations of the customs and mores of the community. These customs, however, have been dictated by a relatively small section of the people. The disabilities imposed by the common law upon married women certainly did not reflect the wishes of that sex. The implied condi- tion in contract law of work before pay can be traced to the dominance of the employing class, while today with a shifting of power, labor unions may combine in a manner denied capital. Holmes in his Common Law pro- claims that the life of the law has not been logic 3 it has been experience, and you have been referred in your courses to tendencies all along the line from formalism to informality, and yet we must admit that the progress has been slow. Covenants in a lease are still regarded as independent, and the tenant when sued for rent cannot defend on the ground that the land- lord has failed to make promised repairs. So, in spite of the custom of merchants, bills of lading and stock certificates have only been made nego- tiable by statute. Legislation has usually been the only way to effect a rapid change. For several other means have appeared for relieving the rigidity of the law. Equity was created for that very purpose, and it was suggested by its early critics that the measure of the Chancellor's conscience was apt to be as uncertain as the length of his foot, but even in equity there has been a hardening of the rules, so that in many cases no relief is granted. The tendency of time is to provide increasing precedents for legal action which in turn points to greater certainty of' decision. There is, however, a tre- mendous loophole in the attitude frequently taken by courts that the facts of a particular case take it out of the control of precedent. Sometimes the reasoning sounds artificial, sometimes it is based on a fragmentary state- ment of fact, and sometimes the decision is not dignified by any reason. lt has been aptly said that hard cases make bad law. A departure from rules of law administered by the courts is found in the growth of administrative boards, such as the Industrial Accident Com- mission and the Public Service Commission, the members of which enforce their views of-what under particular circumstances is fair, sometimes with little regard to established rules. .xi I 1 -l ,L Twelve

Page 19 text:

W X , ' .f '- C1 ,cf-, 1 fin S' xy 1 . ,Y :. 1- Ulf 1.1.1 g Y, f 1 f' X fr .x. . , K-, Rf! X 1 . P . . A , .,i,.w, pi-iilfj, J 1- -. lv V U lil .f ,. .iw ,lm J ,- r, . N-,1 ., -.. - i. f if restraint if he would have any sort of association with his fellows. Even at maturity he feels resentment if restraints are imposed upon him in his pursuit of happiness which are not imposed upon others. This feeling is specially noticeable in the matter of taxation. If one believes the taxes imposed by the government are unnecessarily heavy he may feel some re- sentment, but his resentment is much greater if he believes he is overtaxed in comparison with his fellows. This feeling is not ignoble. It is far dif- ferent from the feeling of envy. If I can only afford to ride in a street car, I may envy the man who can afford to ride in a luxurious automobile, and yet not feel wronged. But if I am excluded from a public street car to which he is admitted I have a different feeling,--that of resentment. This feeling is natural. Nature is impartial in the application of its laws. It allows no exemption. The rain falls on all alike, and the fires burn the weak as well as the strong. Who then is to determine what degree of restraint on liberty is neces- sary to secure this equillibrium which we call justice? Obviously it is society acting through the law. Three elements constitute the content of a judicial decision. Q11 A number of legal precepts more or less definedg C21 A traditional technique of developing and applying legal preceptsg CBJ a body of philosophical, political, economic and ethical ideas as to the end of law. At opposite poles we find the application of absolute rules by the courts, and the exercise by them of unlimited discretion. It has been the proud boast of Massachusetts that it afforded a government of laws and not of men, and in that state the allowance of equity jurisdiction was long delayed. On the other hand many of us feel that the law was made for man rather than man for the law. Possibly these two conceptions can be harmonized. What plan is best in the long run? The great triumph of any system of law is that justice is thereby attained in the vast majority of cases without litigation. If the rules are definite and certain, there is less opportunity for dispute. It is this element of certainty, together with the preference which many men have to be subjected to an inanimate rule rather than to the unbridled will of one of their fellow men that makes lawyers insist that judgments should be based on precedents and the logical extensions thereof. To attain certainty the law must act in gross with rules made for the average case, with the result that the lay mind focussed on a single case is apt to regard the law as arbitrary and technical, and as defeating the ends of justice. This much must be admitted,-we cannot X u ff fjjgfii -fjij,fQ- .9134 , fl L 1,1 -i. ', kgs, far: Q-P TJ - X, f X lu C J A 4 ' . .X ,., .., ,,.,,, .I , f xg, M- .--rf X- .1 -gif '- '-1' s.-V t-H' Elmfen

Page 21 text:

'vf-7 7 , 'fig 'fin' - W it ,fn f . i ig i Finally We have the jury system which makes possible in many cases a disregard for technicalities and even for evidence. The effect is some- times chaotic, although the result frequently is a closer approach to the average man's view of what is right than a judge would feel at liberty to grant. The power of juries has been jealously guarded. Our state con- stitution forbids the re-examination of any fact tried by a jury unless the court can affirmatively say that there is no evidence to support the verdict. There is even pending in Congress a bill to take away from Federal judges the right to comment to the jury on the merits of the evidence. What, then, is the conclusion of the matter? No single method of ad- ministering justice can ever hope to meet with universal satisfaction. Like the Greeks of old all we can do is to strive for an ideal,-ever learning, but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. ' ,fx -P -A K Tl1i1'lm'11