teachers, I have no doubt, believe in a wise combination of all methods that have stood the test of experience. That law school instructor, however, who has no higher conception of legal education. than assigning a certain number of pages per day from a text-book, and who confines himself strictly to a memory recitation upon such pages, fails to comprehend the true province of a teacher. Many of our law schools have not given sufficient attention to the quality of instruction. Trained teachers are as much needed in our professional schools as in our purely academic institutions, and it is often true that one who is eminent at the bar, or illustrious upon the bench, lacks utterly the peculiar art and talent that is requisite in a good teacher.

The methods of law teaching referred to are not, however, scientifically speaking, real methods at all, but are mere details in the working out of methods. There are recognized four methods in the treatment of law as a science, namely, the metaphysical, the analytic, the historical, and the comparative. The great German and French writers upon the law have followed the first, the metaphysical, which treats broadly of the correlation of such abstract ideas as right, wrong, duty, injury, liability, and seeks to adjust the fundamental principles of family relations, obedience to the state, property, and contract, to an ethical basis. Jeremy Bentham, the alleged founder of the analytical method as applied to English law, discarded the ethical idea, and, adopting the theory of utility, he and his followers assume to take the law as it exists, and seek to arrange it into convenient divisions and subtopics. Blackstone, for example, as Mr. Bryce has pointed out, has given us in his Commentaries an excellent exposition of law analytically treated. The

third great method, the historical, in which the present writer firmly believes, seeks to discover, regardless of preconceived theories, how the law came into being, how it developed and grew. It looks upon the law as an evolution, as changing from time to time under the different conditions of society, as becoming obsolete here and there, yet ever growing, ever progressing, and not as something that is fixed or eternally established. It is not satisfied with what the law of to-day may be, but it scoks to trace out the beginnings in order to understand the reasons of principles and rules, and thus to better comprehend the broad foundation of natural justice that historically underlies the entire system. The comparative system

seeks to unite these various methods.

It is clear, therefore, that if one is striving to teach in sympathy with any of these methods, he may, as a means of detail in his work, use text-books, lectures, or reported cases. Personally, I believe that the best results are obtained by a comprehensive outlining of a subject by means of good textbooks and lectures, with well selected cases to illustrate the principles. I thoroughly believe in the student's learning, together with their reasons, the elementary principles of a subject first, and not in introducing the student, at the beginning, to a mass of cases, in the hope, as Mr. Bryce says, that as he rolls himself about in them "some may stick to him."

With reference to the study of cases, few stop to consider the enormous increase of printed reports since the days. of our early jurists. Kent said: "When appointed to the bench, I never dreamed of volumes of reports and written opinions. Such things were not then. thought of. There were no reports or state precedents." When Marshall was

admitted to the bar there was not a single volume of published American reports. To-day there are about five thousand printed volumes, and over a hundred volumes every year are being added. It is clear, at a glance, therefore, that even in those schools where the study of cases is most emphasized that all that can be done is for the instructor to carefully select such leading and illustrative cases as will helpfully impress upon the student the application of principles, and the methods of reasoning by which, in the light of both principles and facts, conclusions are. reached.

After all has been said, however, as to method and detail of the same, the truth remains that it is the personality of the teacher that counts, and, whether one inclines more to one way of teaching or another, it is the heart, the brain, the soul of the teacher that are worth more than all mere system.

In the desire to survey the questions of preliminary and professional education in the law somewhat more broadly, and for the purpose of comparison, I propose to briefly set forth the requirements in some of the leading foreign countries. While it is true that what is excellent or best for one people is not necessarily wise for or adapted to another, nevertheless, since in all matters pertaining to the true principles of education the world is constantly coming nearer and nearer together, it should be of professional interest to the American. lawyer and law student to consider what other nations are thinking and doing in kindred matters. In these days of International Law Associations, when an American lawyer may be the president of such a body, as was Judge Baldwin of Connecticut, in 1900, when also an International Court of Arbitration, for a long time the dream of jurists, has be

come a reality, when in such assemblies American lawyers come into contact with the lawyers of Europe, it certainly is both interesting and practical to know what is the educational preparation and equipment of such foreign lawyers.

The conditions and character of legal education in Canada depend upon the particular section referred to. In all the provinces the legal fraternities are incorporated, and are authorized to make all rules pertaining to the education of students and their admission to the bar. Only such persons as are admitted to membership in these legal societies are permitted to practice law.

Ontario is the only province which requires as a prerequisite to admission a law school attendance. Osgood Hall, the law school located at Toronto, is under the immediate direction and control of the Law Society of Upper Canada. Graduation from this school is the only avenue of admission to the bar in that province. The course covers three years, and here, as in all the other provinces of the Dominion, the minimum preliminary education must be equivalent to a university preparation.

There are law schools in the provinces of Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, but attendance is not obligatory, and excepting Nova Scotia a degree from the schools is not accepted as a credential for bar admission in lieu of a public examination. In all the Canadian schools Roman law is made an important part of the curriculum, and in Quebec, owing to its French settlement, this system of jurisprudence is the basis of the prevailing law.

The four other provinces of the Dominion, namely, Prince Edward Island, the North West Territories, Manitoba, and British Columbia, have no reported law schools, and the Law Societies of

these provinces provide for private reading with an occasional public lecture upon the topics pursued. Throughout all Canada, however, there is an intelligent recognition of what a legal education should mean, and it is not flattering to our national pride to learn that, in general, the requirements as to law studies in the Canadian provinces are greater than they are in some of our American states.

In England, as in America, a collegiate education is not a requisite preliminary to the professional study of the law. Unless, however, the applying student has passed a public examination at some British university, or an examination given by one of the various departments of the public service, he is required to pass a successful examination in the English language, the Latin language, and English history. This examination is prepared by a committee appointed by the four inns of court.

While Oxford and Cambridge universities offer elaborate courses in law, as extensive as those offered by many of the better class of law schools in this country, nevertheless no graduate of the English universities, although he has pursued the law courses, is entitled by virtue of his degree to admission, or, as it is said there, a call to the bar. At the present time, in England, it is only through the inns of court, in London, that admission to the bar is obtained. It is, however, only from the year 1846 that the modern system of English professional education in law dates, and its present high state of development was. attained only within a very recent period.

In the early days the universities of England, being under the control of the ecclesiastics, offered courses in the canon and in the civil law, but refused to offer any instruction in the common

law, which as a scientific system was discredited and even despised by the clergy. This condition of legal study continued for several centuries, and should make a deep impression upon the minds of all modern English and American lawyers relative to the fact that, for a period of more than five hundred years, English law and English legal literature were permeated and permanently influenced by the learning of Roman jurisprudence. Indeed, I am unable to find any evidence that prior to the year 1754, when William Blackstone lectured at Oxford, had any instruction been given in English law in either of the English universities.

Where, therefore, during these centuries had the technical training of English lawyers been given? In the inns of court, even as it is to-day. Upon the fixing of the courts of common pleas at Westminster by King John it was natural that all students who were desirous of familiarizing themselves with the practice of the courts should gather in that vicinity. At some later period, we know not exactly when, certain inns or halls were provided for the lodging and dining places of such students. Blackstone says these inns of court were established when King John fixed the courts there, but there is no positive. foundation for this statement, and with Lord Mansfield we may more safely say that the exact time of their institution is uncertain. At any rate, in time, the old town houses or the inns (not meaning public taverns) of Earls Gray and Lincoln, also the assembly halls of the Knights Templar, were purchased, and thereby the four inns or halls of the law courts arose, namely, Gray's Inn, Lincoln's Inn, the Middle Temple, and the Inner Temple. In addition to these. inns of court there were various inns of chancery, used probably by the clerks.

and by younger students preparing for admission to the inns of court.

In these lanes and alleys, chapels and gardens, the fraternities or guilds of lawyers walked and lived with their pupils, made their own regulations as to their studies, and in due time, subject to the approval of the judges, called their young associates to the bar. Here through the centuries, in face of the hostility of the universities, our common law was preserved. There is no doubt that had it not been for these schools of law, imperfect though they were, that England would have been brought entirely under the influence of the civil law. Prof. Maitland does not exaggerate when he says, "It was the inns of court that saved English law in the age of the Renaissance."

Sir John Fortescue, Chief Justice of the King's Bench, says in his treatise De Laudibus Legum Angliæ that in his day (and Fortescue died a few years before Columbus discovered America) over two thousand students at one time were studying law in the various inns of chancery and of court.

I have made this brief digression into the mediæval law schools of England only for the purpose of explaining why it is that the present inns of court have a monopoly of legal education in that country. Having been the conservators of the common law for centuries, the traditions, the associations, the influences, the comradeships, the spirit of professional loyalty, of both bench and bar, are centered in these schools. Coke, Holt, Hale, Blackstone, Hardwicke, and many others of eminent fame in English jurisprudence were students. here. Sir Thomas Lyttleton was one of the readers at the Inner Temple. Coke, who wrote his famous commentary upon Lyttleton's Tenures, was also one of the benchers, or readers, in the

same inn. Bacon was a reader at Gray's Inn. In fact the history of the inns of court is practically the history of the English bar.

Coming to the present day, it is important that the American lawyer or law student should have dissipated from his. mind certain ridiculous notions relative to the character of the work now being done in these inns of court. The notion prevails in some quarters that the students there are not worked very hard. This is erroneous. In their early history the inns required close study. In later times it is true, however, that they degenerated, and as far as rigid application was concerned the course of study there became a farce. No examinations of any kind were required, and one was eligible to a call to the bar if he had kept twelve terms at the inns. Attendance upon terms was shown by the number of dinners eaten there, five dinners being the minimum attendance at a term. Consequently, upon satisfactory evidence of having eaten sixty dinners at the inns, one was as of course entitled to admission to the bar.

At the present time, however, all is changed. In 1846 the Council of Legal Education was organized by the benchers, or governing officers, of the four inns. This council consists of twenty benchers, five from each inn. The solicitors act of 1877 (40 and 41 Vict., c. 25) gave to the Incorporated Law Society (whose charters were granted in 1845 and in 1872) full control of preliminary and final examinations.

Before taking his examinations for a call to the bar, a student must have kept twelve terms at the inns, four terms being reckoned to the year, and as one of the old traditions a term is kept by eating a certain number of dinners at the hall. The public examination, however, which follows, is quite a different thing

from the old examinations, or the lack of them, and there are but few schools or states in this country which are as exacting in their requirements.

Upon successfully completing his examinations a certificate to practice is granted by the council. The old inns used to give titles or degrees, known as "barrister" and "sergeant," corresponding to our bachelor and master, respectively. To-day, the title of sergeant is no longer conferred, and a barrister's ambition is to be enrolled a K. C. (King's Counsel), which honor may be attained after a stated term of service at the bar. It will be remembered that in England an "attorney" is a sort of barrister's assistant. The attorney prepares the papers, the pleadings, the brief. By the rules of court, no barrister is in general permitted to appear without the preliminary assistance of an attorney.

Passing to the continent of Europe, we find an even more exacting system of legal study. While in the United States and in England it is not necessary that a university education should precede professional study for the law, in all other European countries it is absolutely essential. This is true, e. g., in France, Germany, Italy, Austria, Russia, Spain, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, and Switzerland. In all these countries the law is distinctively a learned profession. In Europe, therefore, outside of Great Britain and Ireland, a young man who becomes a lawyer must pursue a course in jurisprudence at some university. The European universities that is, those of continental Europe-are conducted upon a different plan from the typical American and English university. With us the university gathers its professional schools. around its school of general liberal culture, the "college." In continental Europe the university consists entirely of

professional or special schools, the rigid preparation that is required for entrance being obtained in the so called secondary schools, such as the gymnasium in Germany, and the lyceum in France.

Each university is divided into "faculties," the four regular faculties being law, medicine, theology, and philosophy. Some universities, however, have only two faculties, such as law and medicine, or law and theology. The student who is to become a lawyer must pursue his studies under the law faculty, just as the prospective physician must take his courses in medicine. In Germany, after three and a half years of university study, the law student takes his graduation examination. Upon successfully passing this, he is entitled to enter upon what is known as the "service of prac

tical preparation." tical preparation." No bar examination is held, but after all this theoretical university work the "practical preparation" covers a period of three years more, and is required of all lawyers. One year of the three is spent in the public administration service, a year and a half in service in the lower courts, and six months in the assistance of a lawyer who practices before the higher courts. If at the expiration of this period the lawyer desires to be admitted to the higher courts, or to be eligible for a judgeship, he must pass a second public examination.

We see here, therefore, the most exacting legal training in the world. After entering the university it requires between six and seven years before the lawyer can expect any remuneration, his three years of "practical preparation" being without pay. In general, we may say that the duties of a lawyer in Germany are substantially the same as in the United States, there being no distinction between attorneys and barristers, as in England.