supported in the broad proposition it attempts to establish. Indeed the learned judge who delivered the opinion in that case seems to have been conscious that he was annexing to the contract of the carrier of passengers what had not hitherto been understood to form a part of it, and attempts to palliate it by saying: "Though this may seem a hard rule, it is probably the best that can be laid down, since it is plain and of easy application, and, when once established, is distinct notice to all parties of their duties. And, practically, it will be likely to work no more burdensome results to carriers of passengers than to leave them, with an uncertain criterion of responsibility, to the trouble and expense of strongly litigated contests bofore juries." We had never before supposed that any plea of conveniency, or ease of application, was a sufficient excuse for a departure from, or innovation upon the common law, especially so far as to introduce new and onerous obligations into the contracts of parties.

We are in favor of holding all carriers of passengers to the exercise of the highest degree of human skill, care and foresight, but to make them liable for a disaster arising from a latent defect in the machinery which they are obliged to use, which no human skill, care or foresight could either have prevented or detected, is neither just nor reasonable, nor requisite to the safety of the public.

LAW AND LAWYERS IN LITERATURE.

Law and lawyers have always been a prominent subject for comment, and not infrequently, of ridicule, in literature. A good deal of this is too familiar to justify review. Every school-boy has grown gloomy over Eugene Aram, and cried at the court scenes in The Heart of Mid-Lothian. The first law book read by the young man on entering the study of our profession is usually Ten Thousand a Year, by the amiable and funny, but rather mean-spirited Mr. Samuel Warren, who mixes up some bad law with a good deal of toadyism and servility. We are all quito well acquainted with Mr. Dickens' legal charactersTulkinghorn and Vholes, Sampson Brass and his sister Sally, Justice Nupkins and his clerk Jinks, Sergeant Buzfuz and promising young Mr. Phunkey, Messrs. Doddson & Fogg, the inexorable partner Jorkins, etc., and with the admirable and humane spirit of his satire on the abuses of the chancery system. If Mr. Dickens had done nothing else in this way except to draw that wonderful scene in Our Mutual Friend, in which Rogue Riderhood makes his "Alfred Davy," he would have demonstrated at once his acute knowledge of human nature and of the workings of legal affairs. I suppose there are certain other weak persons beside myself who have been tempted into reading certain of Mr. Anthony Trollope's novels, in which legal matters are marvelously but dully dealt with. Those who are favorable to the admission of women to the bar will find warrant for their opinions in two works of fiction-to mention the sublime and the ridiculous in one breath-The Merchant of Venice and Griffith Gaunt. All these things are familiar, and have been well commented on by a writer for the

American Law Review, in an article entitled Law in Romance, in the number for April, 1867.

It has long been a favorite project of mine to carry this research further back and more extensively into literature, and to trace how law and lawyers stood in the estimation of the older and less familiar moralists, dramatists, and novelists. The field, I am sure, is a rich and inviting one, and however incompletely I may succeed in developing its interest, I shall be entirely satisfied if my essay shall operate to induce the study of our more ancient authors.

I shall endeavor at first to preserve something like a chronological series, but if in the course of my investigations anything new turns up, which ought to have been inserted before, I shall not allow any restriction to the order of time to prevent its insertion out of place. Nor shall I permit my predilection for the English tongue to prohibit some little rambling into foreign countries and literatures. In short, I propose to be as rambling and desultory as Dr. Foster's children, under the influence of the paternal rod, when they danced

"Out of England into France;

Out of France into Spain;

Then he made 'em dance back again."

In the "Herdsman's Happy Life," found in Byrd's Songs (1588), we read:

"For lawyers and their pleading
They 'steem it not a straw;

They think that honest meaning
Is of itself a law;

Where conscience judgeth plainly,
They spend no money vainly."

CHAUCER.

Before this, Chaucer had described a lawyer as one of the Canterbury Pilgrims:

"A Sergeant of the Lawe, ware and wise,
That often hadde yben at the paruis,*
Ther was also, ful riche of excellence.
Discrete he was, and of gret reverence:
He semed swiche,† his wordes were so wise,
Justice he was ful often in assise,
By patent, and by pleine commissioun;
For his science, and for his high renoun,
Of fees and robes had he many on.
So grete a pourchasour was nowher non.
All was fee simple in him to effect,
His pourchasing might not ben in suspect.
Nowhere so besy a man as he ther n'as,
And yet he semed besier than he was.
In termes hadde he cas and domes? alle,
That fro the time of King Will weren falle.
Thereto he coude endite, and make a thing,
Ther coude no wight pinche¶ at his writing.
And every statute coude he plaine by rote.
He rode but homely in a medlee cote,
Girt with a senit** of silk, with barres smale;
Of his array tell I no longer tale."

Parvis, church portico. † Such. { Opinions. Find flaw. ** Girdle.

What a vivid description, especially the touch "seemed busier than he was."

SELDEN.

The learned Selden, in "Table Talk," has an interesting section on law, in which the most striking observation is: "Ignorance of the law excuses no man; not that all men know the law, but because 'tis an excuse every man will plead, and no man can tell how to confute him,"

the desperate cures; good fees beget good causes; prerogative of the crowns will carry the matter; the assistant sits to-morrow, and he's your friend; your moneyed men love naturally, and as your loves are clear, so are your causes. Hang the penurious! their causes, like their purses, have poor issues." But he "must have witnesses enough and ready-substantial, fearless souls-that will swear suddenly-that will swear anything; for variety, they may swear truth, else 'tis not much look'd after." He then advises his client to "see" the judge, and dismisses him with "go, and believe i' the law." Before they come into court, the defendant assails Bartolus with foul language, and insinuates that he "would plead a needy client's cause for a starv'd hen, or half a little loin of veal, though fly-blown." Bartolus' opening speech in court is quite in the modern vein:

"If I stood here

To plead in the defence of an ill man,
Most equal judge, or to accuse the innocent,
(To both which I profess myself a stranger),

It would be requisite I should deck my language
With tropes and figures, and all flourishes
That grace a rhetorician; 'tis confess'd
Adulterate metals need the goldsmith's art
To set 'em off; what in itself is perfect
Contemns a borrowed gloss."

As a matter of course, the court is with Bartolus and his client. On another occasion Bartolus says:

"I have been atoning two most wrangling neighbors; They had no money, therefore I made even."

But Leandro finding scant opportunities to court Amaranta, his friends, the curate and the sexton, enter into a plot to entice Bartolus from home. Diego feigns mortal sickness, and sends Lopez for Bartolus to draw his will. Then ensues a most amusing scene. It is represented to Bartolus that Diego is very rich, and, after making sundry bequests, intends most of his estate for the covetous lawyer. Diego's attendants give him drink to sustain his strength, and he, becoming tipsy, makes the most extravagant and absurd provisions for all sorts of strange objects, and the lawyer is in an agony at seeing his prospects dissipated. After spinning out this will as long as possible, the conspirators confess that they have been fooling Bartolus. He raves, and Diego "finds this cataplasm of a well-cozened lawyer, laid to his stomach, lenifies his fever." In the meantime, the handsome wife and the law student are improving the opportunity at home, and in a pretended attendance at church. On Bartolus' return he rages horribly, but is quieted by Lopez's mention of the inquisition as a terror to those who deny their wives the privilege of church. He pretends to be reconciled, and invites the conspirators to breakfast. They attend, he deprives them of their weapons, surrounds them with officers, and instead of edibles, puts in one dish "an execution for a thousand ducats" against the guest; in another, "a capias from his surgeon and his silk man;" in another, "a strong citation;" and in another, "a warrant to appear before the judges." Out of this mess they are rescued by a deus ex machina, and in the end all parties are reconciled.

In "A Wife for a Month" a "Lawyer, Physician, Captain, and Cutpurse pass over the stage," and Tony, a fool, in his remarks to Podrano concerning the vari

ous "suitors to the widow lady," deals out hard measure to our profession, in respect to our gallantry toward the fair sex:

"Podrano. Why, these are rascals.
Tony. They were meant to be so:

Does thy master deserve better kindred?
Pod. There's an old lawyer,

Trimm'd up like a galley-foist; what would he do with her?

Tony. As usurers do with their gold; he woull look on her,

And read her over once a day, like a hard report,
Feed his dull eye, and keep his fingers itching;
For anything else she may appeal to a parliament;
Subpoenas and posteas have spoil'd his codpiece."

When the suitors present themselves and urge their claims, the lawyer says: "I am a lawyer; I can make her a jointure of any man's land in Naples; and she shall keep it, too; I have a trick for it." To which Tony answers:

"Canst thou make her a jointure of thine honesty, Or thy ability, thou lewd abridgement?

Those are nonsuited and flung o'er the bar." When, to test their sincerity, it is inquired of the suitors which of them will "dare take her for one month, and then die?" the lawyer excuses himself, because

"This is like to be a year of great dissention
Among good people, and I dare not lose it;
There will be money got."
[To be continued.]

THE MORAL STANDING OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION.

A recent writer in the New York Independent makes a violent onslaught on lawyers. "What profession," he asks, "has sent so many representatives to corrupt legislation, and to disgrace human nature by the successful glorification of crime? What profession has given so few saints, so few martyrs, so few moral heroes to the world?" To which we answer, that to lawyers is due a state of social affairs in which there is no longer any possibility of martyrdom or necessity for moral heroism. It is highly probable that if it were not for the profession he reviles, this writer would never have had a chance to publish his foolish article, for these are the days of unlicensed printing. Nearly every trace of social and religious liberty on earth is due to lawyers. No class has been so fruitful of "saints, martyrs, and moral heroes" as the clergy, and yet what a world this would be if ruled by priests! A priest-governed people is synonymous with an ignorant, degraded, superstitious, and unaspiring people. The priests have always been the cause of all "martyrdom," and "moral heroism" was an outgrowth. The physical safety of society, the liberty of religious opinion, the cohesion of our moral system, are all in great measure due to, and dependent on, law and its officers. If it were not for ameliorations which lawyers have effected, some Cotton Mather would still be hanging witches; some Calvin would still be burning Servetus; slavery would overspread the world; lazy monks would still be scaring rich and moribund sinners into large gifts to fatten pretended religious uses. In his recent great work on "European Morals," Mr. Lecky says that no other | agent is so potently beneficial in moulding public

opinion in England at the present day as the newspapers, and that much of their increased influence is due to the fact that the lawyers have taken to writing for them. The truth is, that mankind have always had so poor an opinion of themselves, that, were it not for lawyers, they would still be unwilling to allow to each other the smallest credence, in or out of court. Until lawyers caused the rule to be changed, no person accused of crime could testify on his own behalf, because the theologians had taught that he must necessarily perjure himself, and now all the croaking against the present rule comes from dyspeptic haters of our profession. All the ameliorations of the laws respecting women are due to lawyers, and yet all the women think us a terrible set of fellows. They would prefer counsel like Mrs. Stowe.

It is high time that the vulgar notions about lawyers were done away. They are the offspring of the envy that mankind bear toward those who are able to earn a living without manual exertion or the employment of capital. The deities of society are Muscle and Money, Sheer Intellect is something they grudgingly tolerate. Rich men and laboring men alike are envious of lawyers, and yet we can assure them that if the mean things that lawyers consent to do at the instigation of their clients were weighed against the mean things that they prevent their clients from doing, the balance would incline heavily in favor of the lawyers. In a word, the standard of professional honor among us is as much higher than the standard

of commercial honor - yes, and of clerical honor, too as heaven is higher than earth.

We would like to ask this Independent gentleman a few plain questions. First. To whom does he think Catholic Emancipation in the British Empire was due, to the lawyers of the House of Commons, or to the prelates of the House of Lords? Second. Does he not

think that such men as Sam Adams, John Adams, and Patrick Henry, who represented all the lawyers, were of as much weight in the struggle for American political liberty as the Rev. Mr. Duche, who counselled Washington to surrender the colonies to Great Britain, and who fully represented a large number of the "martyr" and "moral-hero" class in the Middle States? Third. Does he not think that such men as Lord Mansfield, in England, and Abraham Lincoln, Charles Sumner, Thaddeus Stevens, Salmon P. Chase, John Jay, and Ben Butler have had some influence in effecting the abolition of slavery and the slave trade? Fourth. Will he not concede "moral heroism" to such men as John Somers, of England, who defended the seven bishops, and to Daniel O'Connell, and the other reformers and liberators and champions of civil liberty in the legal ranks, whose names shine on every page of history?

As to the charge of corruption, not one in a hundred of our legislative "corruptionists" is a lawyer. "Corruptionists" are the representatives of a constituency who are too envious of our profession to elect them to legislative or municipal office, but elect instead a body of unprincipled and illiterate adventurers, and offer them an inducement to steal by paying them inadequate wages. In the days when lawyers, to some degree, monopolized such offices, corruption was almost unknown. It is the growth of recent times. The

Constitutional Convention proposed a very effectual preventive of legislative corruption in the shape of an article on bribery. Most of our profession voted for the adoption of that article, but it remains to be proved whether the Independent writer and the rest of the folks who dislike lawyers gave it their support.

CURRENT TOPICS.

-A writer in the Chicago Legal News urges the holding of annual meetings of members of the legal profession from every part of the United States, for the discussion of law reforms, similar to meetings held by members of other learned professions both in this country and in Europe. The Jurisconsults of Germany adopted the idea eight years ago, and have since held a congress regularly every year. Their society numbers among its 2,500 members all who are so interested in the law as to be obliged to study itas magistrates, advocates, notaries, or administrators. Its purposes are to examine legal questions and to

promote the unification of German law.

-The Usury law has long since become a dead

letter, and should be stricken from the statute book. Term after term, in obedience to the requirements of the statute, grand juries are charged to inquire into any violations of the Usury law, and yet, day after day, year out and year in, the lenders of money vio

late that law with impunity. Once in a while a spasmodic effort is madee-as was recently the case in New York-to vindicate the law and to punish the offender; but, as in all other cases of spasmodic efforts, little if any good is accomplished. The old reasons for the law are gone, and other and juster laws afford the protection to the debtor which this statute was meant to

give. There are even positive grounds why the law should be abolished. The principal one is that men can no longer afford to lend money at seven per cent. The taxes on property-National, State and Municipal-have increased to such an extent that after paying them there is but a pitiful margin left to the lender for the use of his money. But the fact that the law is not enforced is ground enough for its repeal. The dignity of the State and the interests of society, demand that there should be none but living laws upon our statute books, and that the violators of those laws should be visited with the prescribed penalties. Edmund Burke truly said: "Living law, full of reason and of equity, and of justice (as it is, or it should not exist), ought to be severe and awful too; or the words of menace, whether written on the parchment-roll of England or cut into the brazen tablet of Rome, will excite nothing but contempt."