University of Michigan Law School - Quad Yearbook (Ann Arbor, MI)

Page 78 text:

the Litchfield students our Gould on Common Law Pleadingv. In 1833 this school was merged in the Yale Law School' - Thzhi. A professorship of law in the University of Pennsyl- vania in 1 79o. Here the celebrated james Wilson, an associate jus- tice of the Supreme Court of the United States, delivered his valu- able lectures on Constitutional Law. His opening lecture was delivered December 15, I79O. President Washington and his cabinet were present, also Mrs. Washington and Mrs. Hamilton, and representatives of Congress and of the national and state judiciary. Fourih. In 1817 the Harvard Law School was launched under most favorable auspices. It seems, however, thatnothing can ante- date Harvard. She does not claim to have given legal instruction prior to 1817, but one Israel Royal, an English gentleman who en- joyed some of the luxuries of the battle of Lexington, wrote in 1 779 his will containing this peculiar devise: A gift to Harvard of lands in Massachusetts, to be appropriated towards the endowing a pro- fessor of Law in said College, or a professor in Physic of Anatomy, whichever the Corporation and Overseers of said College shall judge best for its benefit, and they shall have full power to sell said lands and put the money out at interest, the income whereof shall be for the aforesaid purpose . Evidently the testator did not dis- tinguish the radical difference between law and medicine. He was too impartial and too good to outlive his excellent will for more than two years. He died in 1781. The gift was very substantial, but Harvard did not make use of it for over thirty years, and then fortunately turned her mind to the .development of jurisprudence. This is the financial beginning of the Harvard Law School. IVe have said that this famous school opened most auspiciously. The great lawyers of New England hastened to become members of her faculty. We are all familiar with the names of some of those who taught law within her halls during the first forty years of her exist- ence. The names and works of joseph Story, Theophilus Parsons, Simon Greenleaf and Emory Washburn will never be forgotten. We may observe, in passing, that all of these men taught exclusively by what is known as the lecture method in legal education. At present the case method prevails at Harvard, and the lecture method is looked upon with disfavor. This change is largely due -o Mr. Langdell, who was a great teacher, irrespective of his method.

Page 77 text:

credit to ourselves. Most of us had nothing to do with the mak- ing of the product approved of. Possibly those who taught us law are somewhat responsible for the reputation we enjoy. We Hrmly believe in the American law school of to-day, but in selecting methods of instruction and in planning for the future we should be careful lest we undo what our teachers did so well for us. We can afford to study and often follow the old masters. Those young men of the colonial period in our history who were ambitious to become lawyers were seriously embarrassed. There were no law schools, and very few law books. A practicing lawyer of highest rank was not then overburdened with legal litera- ture, in the way of text books, reports of periodicals. He. could carry his entire library in his satchel. T' This paucity of legal litera- ture was not entirely prejudicial. The lawyer of- that period was thrown upon his own resources, and was ,guided simply by the general principles announced by Blackstone, Coke, Britton and Fleta. He took up a concrete case and applied to it an educated common sense. By the force of his logic the court was compelled to agree withhim, and a principle of jurisprudence was established. This historical fact is largely responsible for the development of many men of great intelligence and power, and many of them signed the Declaration of Independence. The existing conditions were decidedly athletic, and strengthened the intellectual muscles. There was little for a man to rest upon but himself. There were no large public or private libraries worth mentioning,.and there was not in America any public school of law, before the period of the American Revo-lution. Our independence once established, important changes in legal H education followed. It became apparent that the law office could not meet the demands of those seeking knowledge in the science of jurisprudence. Attempts were made to organize schools of law. W'e will give an account of these attempts in their chronological order, from the most authen- tic sources: p . Fzvxrf. A professorship in law at lVilliam and Mary college in Virginia in 1782. The work done here was purely academic and not along the lines of professional education. Saofzfi. The Litchfield school established in Connecticut by Tapping Reeve in 1783. Here his great work on Domestic Relations was created, and here judge Gould wrote and delivered to

Page 79 text:

It has not been demonstrated, however, that the early teachers at this institution lectured in vain. Perhaps we owe much to them and to others, who followed their method in other institutions of the country, including our own, for our reputation abroad. It is certain that changes must be made, but, as we have indicated, it is not certain that every new idea is a good one. It is not our purpose, however, to discuss methods in legal education. Fjflz. In I823 james Kent, at the age of sixty, was compelled to retire from his judicial duties, by reason of a constitutional pro- vision of the State-of New York. His age disqualified him. He was too ,old to serve his State, but Columbia College saw its oppor- nity, and on his retirement from his judicial duties, invited him to deliver to its students a course of lectures on jurisprudence. i This invitation was accepted. He was full of vigor and had met with all the experiences at the bar and enjoyed and suffered all the judicial life that his State would allow. He undertook a new work, as he wrote in his letter of acceptance, simply because idleness might 'feast a premature shade over the happiness of declining years. What irony! For four years he lectured to those who desired to hear him, and as a result we have Kent7s Commenta- ries . This book is the wade mwzwz of every American student of law. Columbia College built better than she knew when she extended this invitation to Chancellor Kent. From his work she received an impetus that she still feels. She owes much to the man who first gave momentum to scientific legal education in the metropolis of this country. Attention has been called to what may be said to be the five pioneer efforts in legal education in America. We notice that none of them antedate the revolution. What were the advantages of the law student in colonial times? The answer is easy. He had a law preceptor. The law office was his school room. Here the lawyers of the revolution received their instruction in law. In that day such a thing was possible. There was not much litigation, and there were few towns able to support a- lawyer. As a rule, courts had no permanent habitation. Courts and lawyers traveled over the country doing justice. In practice there was very little special- izing. - Every lawyer was engaged in general litigation and was expected to know it all. Gut of court and in the office there was plenty of time. Cases were not so numerous and varied in character