the path of the law-第5章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


know　what　we　are　doing　when　we　elect。　　

There　is　another　study　which　sometimes　is　undervalued　by　the　practical　
minded；　for　which　I　wish　to　say　a　good　word；　although　I　think　a　good　
deal　of　pretty　poor　stuff　goes　under　that　name。　　I　mean　the　study　of　
what　is　called　jurisprudence。　　Jurisprudence；　as　I　look　at　it；　is　simply　
law　in　its　most　generalized　part。　　Every　effort　to　reduce　a　case　to　a　
rule　is　an　effort　of　jurisprudence；　although　the　name　as　used　in　English　
is　confined　to　the　broadest　rules　and　most　fundamental　conceptions。　　One　
mark　of　a　great　lawyer　is　that　he　sees　the　application　of　the　broadest　
rules。　　There　is　a　story　of　a　Vermont　justice　of　the　peace　before　whom　a　
suit　was　brought　by　one　farmer　against　another　for　breaking　a　churn。　　
The　justice　took　time　to　consider；　and　then　said　that　he　has　looked　
through　the　statutes　and　could　find　nothing　about　churns；　and　gave　
judgment　for　the　defendant。　　The　same　state　of　mind　is　shown　in　all　our　
common　digests　and　textbooks。　　Applications　of　rudimentary　rules　of　
contract　or　tort　are　tucked　away　under　the　head　of　Railroads　or　
Telegraphs　or　go　to　swell　treatises　on　historical　subdivisions；　such　as　
Shipping　or　Equity；　or　are　gathered　under　an　arbitrary　title　which　is　
thought　likely　to　appeal　to　the　practical　mind；　such　as　Mercantile　Law。　　
If　a　man　goes　into　law　it　pays　to　be　a　master　of　it；　and　to　be　a　master　
of　it　means　to　look　straight　through　all　the　dramatic　incidents　and　to　
discern　the　true　basis　for　prophecy。　　Therefore；　it　is　well　to　have　an　
accurate　notion　of　what　you　mean　by　law；　by　a　right；　by　a　duty；　by　
malice；　intent；　and　negligence；　by　ownership；　by　possession；　and　so　
forth。　　I　have　in　my　mind　cases　in　which　the　highest　courts　seem　to　me　
to　have　floundered　because　they　had　no　clear　ideas　on　some　of　these　
themes。　　I　have　illustrated　their　importance　already。　　If　a　further　
illustration　is　wished；　it　may　be　found　by　reading　the　Appendix　to　Sir　
James　Stephen's　Criminal　Law　on　the　subject　of　possession；　and　then　
turning　to　Pollock　and　Wright's　enlightened　book。　　Sir　James　Stephen　is　
not　the　only　writer　whose　attempts　to　analyze　legal　ideas　have　been　
confused　by　striving　for　a　useless　quintessence　of　all　systems；　instead　
of　an　accurate　anatomy　of　one。　　The　trouble　with　Austin　was　that　he　did　
not　know　enough　English　law。　　But　still　it　is　a　practical　advantage　to　
master　Austin；　and　his　predecessors；　Hobbes　and　Bentham；　and　his　worthy　
successors；　Holland　and　Pollock。　　Sir　Frederick　Pollock's　recent　little　
book　is　touched　with　the　felicity　which　marks　all　his　works；　and　is　
wholly　free　from　the　perverting　influence　of　Roman　models。　　

The　advice　of　the　elders　to　young　men　is　very　apt　to　be　as　unreal　as　a　
list　of　the　hundred　best　books。　　At　least　in　my　day　I　had　my　share　of　
such　counsels；　and　high　among　the　unrealities　I　place　the　recommendation　
to　study　the　Roman　law。　　I　assume　that　such　advice　means　more　than　
collecting　a　few　Latin　maxims　with　which　to　ornament　the　discoursethe　
purpose　for　which　Lord　Coke　recommended　Bracton。　　If　that　is　all　that　is　
wanted；　the　title　De　Regulis　Juris　Antiqui　can　be　read　in　an　hour。　　I　
assume　that；　if　it　is　well　to　study　the　Roman　Law；　it　is　well　to　study　
it　as　a　working　system。　　That　means　mastering　a　set　of　technicalities　
more　difficult　and　less　understood　than　our　own；　and　studying　another　
course　of　history　by　which　even　more　than　our　own　the　Roman　law　must　
explained。　　If　any　one　doubts　me；　let　him　read　Keller's　Der　Romische　
Civil　Process　und　die　Actionen；　a　treatise　on　the　praetor's　edict；　
Muirhead's　most　interesting　Historical　Introduction　to　the　Private　Law　
of　Rome；　and；　to　give　him　the　best　chance；　Sohn's　admirable　Institutes。　　
No。　　The　way　to　gain　a　liberal　view　of　your　subject　is　not　to　read　
something　else；　but　to　get　to　the　bottom　of　the　subject　itself。　　The　
means　of　doing　that　are；　in　the　first　place；　to　follow　the　existing　body　
of　dogma　into　its　highest　generalizations　by　the　help　of　jurisprudence；　
next；　to　discover　from　history　how　it　has　come　to　be　what　it　is；　and　
finally；　so　far　as　you　can；　to　consider　the　ends　which　the　several　rules　
seek　to　accomplish；　the　reasons　why　those　ends　are　desired；　what　is　
given　up　to　gain　them；　and　whether　they　are　worth　the　price。　　

We　have　too　little　theory　in　the　law　rather　than　too　much；　especially　on　
this　final　branch　of　study。　　When　I　was　speaking　of　history；　I　mentioned　
larceny　as　an　example　to　show　how　the　law　suffered　from　not　having　
embodied　in　a　clear　form　a　rule　which　will　accomplish　its　manifest　
purpose。　　In　that　case　the　trouble　was　due　to　the　survival　of　forms　
coming　from　a　time　when　a　more　limited　purpose　was　entertained。　　Let　me　
now　give　an　example　to　show　the　practical　importance；　for　the　decision　
of　actual　cases；　of　understanding　the　reasons　of　the　law；　by　taking　an　
example　from　rules　which；　so　far　as　I　know；　never　have　been　explained　or　
theorized　about　in　any　adequate　way。　　I　refer　to　statutes　of　limitation　
and　the　law　of　prescription。　　The　end　of　such　rules　is　obvious；　but　what　
is　the　justification　for　depriving　a　man　of　his　rights；　a　pure　evil　as　
far　as　it　goes；　in　consequence　of　the　lapse　of　time？　　Sometimes　the　loss　
of　evidence　is　referred　to；　but　that　is　a　secondary　matter。　　Sometimes　
the　desirability　of　peace；　but　why　is　peace　more　desirable　after　twenty　
years　than　before？　　It　is　increasingly　likely　to　come　without　the　aid　of　
legislation。　　Sometimes　it　is　said　that；　if　a　man　neglects　to　enforce　
his　rights；　he　cannot　complain　if；　after　a　while；　the　law　follows　his　
example。　　Now　if　this　is　all　that　can　be　said　about　it；　you　probably　
will　decide　a　case　I　am　going　to　put；　for　the　plaintiff；　if　you　take　the　
view　which　I　shall　suggest；　you　possibly　will　decide　it　for　the　
defendant。　　A　man　is　sued　for　trespass　upon　land；　and　justifies　under　a　
right　of　way。　　He　proves　that　he　has　used　the　way　openly　and　adversely　
for　twenty　years；　but　it　turns　out　that　the　plaintiff　had　granted　a　
license　to　a　person　whom　he　reasonably　supposed　to　be　the　defendant's　
agent；　although　not　so　in　fact；　and　therefore　had　assumed　that　the　use　
of　the　way　was　permissive；　in　which　case　no　right　would　be　gained。　　Has　
the　defendant　gained　a　right　or　not？　　If　his　gaining　it　stands　on　the　
fault　and　neglect　of　the　landowner　in　the　ordinary　sense；　as　seems　
commonly　to　be　supposed；　there　has　been　no　such　neglect；　and　the　right　
of　way　has　not　been　acquired。　　But　if　I　were　the　defendant's　counsel；　I　
should　suggest　that　the　foundation　of　the　acquisition　of　rights　by　lapse　
of　time　is　to　be　looked　for　in　the　position　of　the　person　who　gains　
them；　not　in　that　of　the　loser。　　Sir　Henry　Maine　has　made　it　fashionable　
to　connect　the　archaic　notion　of　property　with　prescription。　　But　the　
connection　is　further　back　than　the　first　recorded　history。　　It　is　in　
the　nature　of　man's　mind。　　A　thing　which　you　have　enjoyed　and　used　as　
your　own　for　a　long　time；　whether　property　or　an　opinion；　takes　root　in　
your　being　and　cannot　be　torn　away　without　your　resenting　the　act　and　
trying　to　defend　yourself；　however　you　came　by　it。　　The　law　can　ask　no　
better　justification　than　the　deepest　instincts　of　man。　　It　is　only　by　
way　of　reply　to　the　suggestion　that　you　are　disappointing　the　former　
owner；　that　you　refer　to　his　neglect　having　allowed　the　gradual　
dissociation　between　himself　and　what　he　claims；　and　the　gradual　
association　of　it　with　another。　　If　he　knows　that　another　is　doing　acts　
which　on　their　face　show　that　he　is　on　the　way　toward　establishing　such　
an　association；　I　should　argue　that　in　justice　to　that　other　he　was　
bound　at　his　peril　to　find　out　whether　the　other　was　acting　under　his　
permission；　to　see　that　he　was　warned；　and；　if　necessary；　stopped。　　

I　have　been　speaking　about　the　study　of　the　law；　and　I　have　said　next　to　
nothing　about　what　commonly　is　talked　about　in　that　connectiontext…
books　and　the　case　system；　and　all　the　machinery　with　which　a　student　
comes　most　immediately　in　contact。　　Nor　shall　I　say　anything　about　them。　　
Theory　is　my　subject；　not　practical　details。　　The　modes　of　teaching　have　
been　improved　since　my　time；　no　doubt；　but　ability　and　industry　will　
master　the　raw　material　with　any　mode。　　Theory　is　the　most　important　
part　of　the　dogma　of　the　law；　as　the　architect　is　the　most　important　man　
who　takes　part　in　the　building　of　a　house。　　The　most　important　
improvements　of　the　last　twenty…five　years　are　improvements　in　theory。　　
It　is　not　to　be　feared　as　unpractical；　for；　to　the　competent；　it　simply　
means　going　to　the　bottom　of　the　subject。　　For　the　incompetent；　it　
sometimes　is　true；　as　has　been　said；　that　an　interest　in　general　ideas　
means　an　absence　of　particular　knowledge。　　I　remember　in　army　days　
reading　of　a　youth　who；　being　examined　for　the　lowest　grade　and　being　
asked　a　question　about　squadron　drill；　answered　that　he　never　had　
considered　the　evolutions　of　less　than　ten　thousand　men。　　But　the　weak　
and　foolish　must　be　left　to　their　folly。　　The　danger　is　that　the　able　
and　practical　minded　should　look　with　indifference　or　distrust　upon　
ideas　the　connection　of　which　with　their　business　is　remote。　　I　heard　a　
story；　the　other　day；　of　a　man　who　had　a　valet　to　whom　he　paid　high　
wages；　subject　to　deduction　for　faults。　　One　of　his　deductions　was；　〃For　
lack　of　imagination；　five　dollars。〃　　The　lack　is　not　confined　to　valets。　　
The　object　of　ambition；　power；　generally　presents　itself　nowadays　in　the　
form　of　money　alone。　　Money　is　the　most　immediate　form；　and　is　a　proper　
object　of　desire。　　〃The　fortune；〃　said　Rachel；　〃is　the　measure　of　
intelligence。〃　　That　is　a　good　text　to　waken　people　out　of　a　fool's　
paradise。　　But；　as　Hegel　says；　〃It　is　in　the　end　not　the　appetite；　but　
the　opinion；　which　has　to　be　satisfied。〃　　To　an　imagination　of　any　scope　
the　most　far…reaching　form　of　power　is　not　money；　it　is　the　command　of　
ideas。　　If　you　want　great　examples；　read　Mr。　Leslie　Stephen's　History　of　
English　Thought　in　the　Eighteenth　Century；　and　see　how　a　hundred　years　
after　his　death　the　abstract　speculations　of　Descartes　had　become　a　
practical　force　controlling　the　conduct　of　men。　　Read　the　works　of　the　
great　German　jurists；　and　see　how　much　more　the　world　is　governed　today　
by　Kant　than　by　Bonaparte。　　We　cannot　all　be　Descartes　or　Kant；　but　we　
all　want　happiness。　　And　happiness；　I　am　sure　from　having　known　many　
successful　men；　cannot　be　won　simply　by　being　counsel　for　great　
corporations　and　having　an　income　of　fifty　thousand　dollars。　　An　
intellect　great　enough　to　win　the　prize　needs　other　food　besides　
success。　　The　remoter　and　more　general　aspects　of　the　law　are　those　
which　give　it　universal　interest。　　It　is　through　them　that　you　not　only　
become　a　great　master　in　your　calling；　but　connect　your　subject　with　the　
universe　and　catch　an　echo　of　the　infinite；　a　glimpse　of　its　
unfathomable　process；　a　hint　of　the　universal　law。　　




End