of those objects, it has naturally happened that the writers of some of the longer articles in dealing with the subject of legal education have discussed other questions which affect the practice and the status of the profession. It is due to the Association to remind our readers that it has carefully limited its functions to the work of creating a proper system of legal education. "Its views," as Sir Roundell Palmer said in his address, "were carefully guarded so far as pledging themselves to these two objects only, namely, first the establishment of a Law University for the education of students intended for the profession of the law,' and secondly, the placing of the admission to both branches of the profession on the basis of a combined test of collegiate education and examination by a public board of examiners."" Whether the present strict line of demarcation which separates the practice of one from the practice of the other branch of the profession should be retained, and, if not, whether it should be removed altogether or only partially, are questions which have nothing to do with an organisation intended to give both branches a better kind of education; except so far as that better education will enable both branches to discuss all questions affecting their common profession in a broader and more intelligent spirit. The business of providing effective machinery for teaching the science of law and testing the results of such teaching, stands before everything in "the process of law reform." The establishment of an efficient law school would, as the circular of the Association very properly observes, "be the best preparation for a reform of the law itself." For all the defects in our positive law, the unsystematic creation of new rules, both judicial and legislative, the useless and bewildering treatises which crowd our bookshelves, the empirical practice of our courts, which justifies Mr. Justice Hannen's severe comparison of the successful lawyer with the skilful "bone-setter," are entirely due to the shameful neglect with which the science of jurisprudence has been. treated in this country. Those, therefore, who have at heart

the highest interests of the profession, will most worthily serve it by helping to place it in its proper position as a science. The best methods of applying it as an art may be safely left to be adjusted by the common sense of the public and the profession.

The prominent and important position which the Association has now reached has only been attained after more than two years of incessant, though comparatively private, effort. At every step they took, the Committee were met by difficulties of all kinds, some of which, as we shall presently see, are still to be dealt with. Up to the time of the meeting, at which the Association was formally constituted, their scheme was discredited by absurd rumours, that the whole profession was to be revolutionised, that the two branches were to be amalgamated, that the Hon. Societies of the Inns of Court were to be abolished, and their property confiscated, and so

These rumours were effectually silenced by Sir Roundell Palmer's able and convincing address. There was to be no revolution, professional or otherwise; they proposed no fusion of the two branches. "That institution (the future law school or University) was not to deal with anything but legal education, and the tests to be provided, so far as they contemplated anything, contemplated the existence of distinctions between the two branches of the profession." So far from proposing the abolition of the Hon. Societies of the Inns of Court, the Association "did not presume to dictate to the Inns of Court in any way whatever with respect to their internal organisation or government. If they were to have a legal University, he (Sir R. Palmer) would like to see his own College (Lincoln's Inn) incorporated with it as one of its Colleges; but that was for the Inns of Court themselves to determine."

One of the most significant and gratifying circumstances attending the movement has been the general and cordial support which has been given to it by the leading men belonging to, or in any way connected with, the profession. For

the first time, we believe, in the history of any agitation for legal reform, a large number of the judges have not only expressed approval of this scheme, but have authorised the public announcement of their approval in the circular of the Association, whilst others, without authorising their names to be published, have expressed opinions in favour of the movement. Eminent ex-judges have written to say that the proposed scheme has their hearty well wishes. The Attorneyand Solicitor-General have joined the Council of the Association, amongst the members of which will be found most of our leading barristers, side by side with members of the chief firms of solicitors in London and all the principal provincial towns. Then, again, in still more curious juxtaposition with the professional lawyers, we find the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and London, represented by men of eminence as jurists and teachers; Oxford, by its Regius Professor of Civil Law, Dr. Bryce; its Corpus Professor of Jurisprudence, Dr. Maine; its Chichele Professor of International Law, Dr. Bernard; and its Vinerian Reader of Law, Mr. Kenelm Digby; Cambridge, by its Regius Professor of Court Law, Dr. Abdy; London University, by the Professor of Jurisprudence at University College, Dr. Amos.

The explanation of this is to be found in the fact that the Committee have dealt with the subject of legal education in no narrow, professional, or local spirit. They have felt that they can only accomplish the object they have before them-that, namely, of rescuing the science of law from the degradation into which it has fallen-by extending the facilities for its study in every direction. Acting in this broad and catholic spirit, they have boldly and successfully defied the bigoted exclusiveness which would keep the education of the solicitor jealously apart from that of the barrister, and have persuaded leading men in both branches to combine for the purpose of obtaining so far as practicable a common education. How far such a common education is practicable is a matter of detail, which will have to be worked

VOL. XXX.-NO. LIX,

K

out further on. Enough for the present that a common purpose has united both branches in a sensible and cordial alliance.

Moreover, the promoters of the movement have wisely declined to be controlled by any merely local influences or traditions. It is true they have assumed that London will be the educational centre of the new system, that there must be a metropolitan school of law, with its staff of teachers and board of examiners. But this, as Mr. Grant Duff long since pointed out, is a local necessity. The Universities can never, under the most favourable circumstances, do more for the ordinary student intended for the pursuit of a profession, than train him for the acquisition of special professional knowledge. "What the Universities have mainly donewhat I found the University did for me," said Carlyle, himself the most distinguished student of the University, whose students he was addressing, "was that it taught me to read in various languages and various sciences, and for the rest, in regard to all your studies here" (at Edinburgh)," and whatever you may learn, you must remember that the object is not particular knowledge that you are going to get higher in technical perfection, and that sort of thing."* The final and special professional school must be where the professional practice goes on, and where the professional training may be best had. Whatever changes may be effected in the direction of localising our procedure, the most important legal work of the country will always come to London. There also the ability and experience of both branches of the profession will always be mainly found; for there the higher professional prizes must always be sought. It would be idle therefore to talk of creating the new educational machinery anywhere else than in London. At the same time the promoters of the movement have made it clearly understood, that every encouragement will be afforded to the study of jurisprudence in its purely scientific aspect, not only at the older Univer* Address as Lord Rector to the students of Edinburgh University.

sities, but wherever opportunities for promoting the study offer. Hence it is that the professors and readers whose names we have given have joined the council of the Association, and expressed their intention of giving it their assistance, without, of course, committing themselves to any details. The relations which the Association has already succeeded in establishing with the Societies, hitherto more or less representing both branches of the profession, make us hope that one of the most difficult and delicate parts of its task, that of obtaining the co-operation of existing vested interests, is almost accomplished. The course which it has taken, has been at the same time decided and conciliatory. In its preliminary statement no doubt was left as to the scope of its action;—the establishment of a law University or school in London, a complete and thorough system of legal education, and a satisfactory method for testing the results of such education. In plain language the Inns of Court and the Incorporated Law Society were informed that neither could supply this want. But, anxious to use the words of its president, "to do nothing and say nothing which might in any way whatever throw difficulties in the way of those who could help them in forwarding the cause," the Committee, both in its printed statement and its private communications with all of the Societies, earnestly drew attention to the fact that they might afford invaluable help by taking part in the organization which would be required. In this way it has appealed directly and impressively to the good sense and right feeling of the Benchers, and the appeal has been answered in a way which has taken a large section of the profession and the outside public by surprise. Before the long vacation the Middle Temple, "in a manner quite worthy of the zeal which it has at all times exhibited in the cause of Legal Education, had responded most generously, and had not only appointed a committee to communicate with the Council of the Association and with the committees of the other Inns of Court, but had recorded its approval of the views of the Association.