一九世紀後半イングランド法曹養成制度の展開とその帰結 : セルボーン卿総合法科学校設立法案に関連して
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
The lack of systematic education in English Law and the urgent need to revive educational system in the inns of court were widely recognized in the Report of Select Committee of Legal Education in 1846. As a result, the Council of Legal Education was organized by four Inns in 1852 and five readerships were established, but the examination did not become compulsory for call to bar. For the reformers the steps taken by inns was too slow and insufficient to improve the legal education in England. The Report of the Commissioners in 1855 recommended to establish a Legal University to promote educational reform, but bore no immediate fruits. The new wave rose from another branch of the professions. That was the rising profession of country attorneys/solicitors practicing at County Courts, newly established in 1846. In the local law societies' meeting held at Leeds in 1868, Jevons, a Liverpool Solicitor, proposed the plan to found a legal university to provide common legal education for both professions as a measure to level both the legal professions. The project got the support of the reformist barristers, especially Sir Roundell Palmer, the future Chancellor Lord Selborne, and under his presidency the Legal Education Association was founded to promote the movement to establish a central university in London. In the face of the enlarging movement among local solicitors, articled clerks, and university professors, the conservative benchers who monopolized the administration of inns of court made the examination compulsory for call to bar only to set the proposal of LEA back. Against the counterattack from the conservative benchers, Palmer produced the Resolutions on General School of Law to Commons in Parliament in 1872. Though the resolutions was rejected by a majority of 13, the movement was not defeated at once. Soon Palmer was promoted to Lord Chancellor and the abolition of the forms of action in 1875 would enlarge the ground for common education to both professions. Nevertheless, the movement itself declined in the late 70's. In his Memoirs, Lord Selborne point out three reasons for the failure. The first was the fear for fusion or amalgamation, the second was jealousy of London university and the third was misunderstanding to common education. It is true the Resolution met with strong opposition from London University Members. In addition, the conservative benchers of Lincoln's Inn got the strong mouthpiece in Commons, Solicitor General Jessel, who was also one of London University Alumni. These might be the reasons why the resolution or bill failed, but do not explain why "the movement outside Parliament declined. As Attorney General suspected at the debate in Commons, the reformist barristers feared that statutory established institution might cause the state intervention to liberal profession. The more Palmer stressed the public character and responsibility of inns of court, the more the fear for state intervention seemed to increased. Withdrawal of the reformist barristers, as Lord Selborn himself stated, was crucial to the movement. Finally the Solicitors Act in 1877 decide the fate of the movement. By this Act the Incorporated Law Society for the first time became the examining body to qualify solicitors. No one could expect them to endanger this fruit indispensable to professional association to establish General School of Law. Solicitors needs a statute to become a self-qualifying society, but Inns of court has already been the self-qualifying societies without help of statutes. It was no wonder that the fear for state intervention to their liberal profession surpassed the zeal for educational reform.
- 関西学院大学の論文
- 2004-09-30