| | |
|
AndrewMcCormickProject 23 - 01 Feb 2010 - Main.AndrewMcCormick
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
-- AndrewMcCormick - 13 Nov 2009 | |
<
< | This remains a work in progress, and is not quite finished draft. I'm considering this to be part one of the project, a general overview of my area of interest, and I plan to revise and add a section of more specific work this semester after spending more time reading Hamlin and Chroust, and visiting the NY Hist. Soc. | >
> | This remains a work in progress, and is not quite finished draft. I'm considering this to be part one of the project, a general overview of my area of interest, and I plan to revise and add a section of more specific work this semester after spending more time on Hamlin and Chroust, and visiting the NY Historical Society | | | Contents | | | Several instances in a 1907 Yale Law Journal article suggest that bar admissions criteria were severely lax, and one might suppose the ease of entry would extend to character standards. In Kentucky, a candidate who was unable to supply any correct answers to legal questions was admitted on the theory that no one would employ him "anyhow." (Rhode in FN20, quoting Smith, Admission to the Bar in New York, 16 Yale L.J. (1907), attached below as 16_YLJ_514). Chroust thought that same instance, along with one other from the same state and a story from California, demonstrated how "deplorably lax, in the main" bar examinations could be saying: | |
<
< | following two paragraphs need block quoting
"In Kentucky a candidate was unable to give one single correct answer. Nevertheless, he was admitted on the ground stated officially by the Court which acted as an examining board that "no one would employ him anyhow."The question of character fitness of another candidate was duly met by the statement of the court that he "had never fought a duel with deadly weapons either in the state or without the state with a citizen of the state [of Kentucky]" (Chroust II, 38). | >
> | "In Kentucky a candidate was unable to give one single correct answer. Nevertheless, he was admitted on the ground stated officially by the Court which acted as an examining board that "no one would employ him anyhow."The question of character fitness of another candidate was duly met by the statement of the court that he "had never fought a duel with deadly weapons either in the state or without the state with a citizen of the state [of Kentucky]" (Chroust II, 38). | | | He also told a story out of California: | |
<
< | “In California two “law students,” who had clerked in the same building, had applied for admission to the bar. One day a member of the Supreme Court of California called upon one of the students and announced that he had come to ascertain his professional qualifications. The whole examination consisted in the question: “Is the Legal Tender Act constitutional?” The student replied: "It is" Whereupon the judge observed: “I have just examined your friend in the other office and he says that the Act is unconstitutional, but we need lawyers who are able to answer great constitutional questions so quickly, right or wrong. Your are both admitted" (Chroust II, 38). | >
> | “In California two “law students,” who had clerked in the same building, had applied for admission to the bar. One day a member of the Supreme Court of California called upon one of the students and announced that he had come to ascertain his professional qualifications. The whole examination consisted in the question: “Is the Legal Tender Act constitutional?” The student replied: "It is" Whereupon the judge observed: “I have just examined your friend in the other office and he says that the Act is unconstitutional, but we need lawyers who are able to answer great constitutional questions so quickly, right or wrong. Your are both admitted" (Chroust II, 38). | | | The end of 19th and beginning of 20th century saw formalization and stiffening of policies, but number of those denied entry for character reasons remained very small. In 1878 the ABA formed in New York, including formalizing rules for character, "Court of Appeals fixed requirements for preliminary education and proof of character" and required that "as a condition precedent to admission to the Bar, the character of each applicant will be subjected to a scrutiny which will be genuine and not perfunctory." (Smith, Admission to the Bar in New York, 16 Yale L.J. (1907), attached below as 16_YLJ_514). Before that time, there was no code of ethics and education remained informal. See generally, The ABA's Bar History page. |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |