BILL PRESENTED. FIRST READING. (Hansard, 4 May 1875)

§ LORD SELBORNE

said, he had now to bring under the notice of their Lord-ships a subject quite distinct from that regarding which he had previously addressed them—namely, the subject of Legal Education. It was now many years since a very general current of opinion had set in, in condemnation of the system of Legal Education pursued in this country. The opinion of those who had considered the matter was that the position of Legal Education in England was inferior to that of Legal Education in any other civilized country of Europe. The Incorporated Law Society, which was composed of gentlemen practising as solicitors and attorneys, was entitled to the credit of having taken the first steps in the direction of improvement. So far back as 1836—with the concurrence of the Judges—they established an effective system of compulsory examination, to be undergone before admission of students to the practice of their branch of the Profession. In 1846, a Committee of the House of Commons inquired into the whole subject of Legal Education as affecting all branches of the legal profession. They made a valuable Report, which recommended the establishment of a Legal University for the purpose of a well-organized system of Legal Edu- 9 cation, contemplating, indeed, that in that system the Inns of Court should take the leading part, but so, that some parts, at least, of the instruction afforded by them should be made available, not only for the benefit of barristers, but also for that of the members of the other branches of the Legal Profession. In 1854, a Royal Commission was appointed, and that Commission affirmed the views of the Select Committee of 1846 as to the deficiency of our system of Legal Education. One consequence of these movements was that in 1851 the Inns of Court organized, for the benefit of students for the Bar, a Council of Legal Education, which appointed Readers on different branches of the law, who were paid out of the funds of the four Societies. That plan was a narrow one, and had been attended with only small results. He did not mean to say it was not a good beginning, but he did say that it would be a very unsatisfactory end. In 1870, there was formed an association of persons desirous of establishing a larger and better system of Legal Education. They desired to have a University or General School of Law founded on comprehensive principles, in which students for whatever branch of the Profession might be instructed, and the Bill which he now desired to introduce contained provisions to that end. Three principles had been adhered to in the propositions he now made to the House, and in the Bill which he laid on the Table last year. The first of those was, that it was desirable that a General School of Law should be established in the Metropolis, by public authority, in the government of which the Crown should have some share of authority, and both the great branches of the Legal Profession should be fairly and impartially represented. The second was, that it was desirable, in the establishment of such a school, to provide for examinations, to be held by examiners, impartially chosen; and to require certificates of the passing of those examinations which might respectively be deemed proper for the several branches of the Legal Profession, as necessary qualifications—after a time to be limited—for admission to practice in those branches respectively. The third was, that the benefits of the course of study and of the examinations conducted in the Legal University should be 10 open to all students, whether their intention was to follow the profession of the law or not, and in whatever branch of that Profession those who meant to follow it might intend to practise. Those propositions had received the concurrence and support of a very large number of persons interested in Legal Education—of many Judges, and leading and junior members of the Bar, and of the great body of solicitors throughout the country. They were communicated to the Inns of Court, and also to the Incorporated Law Society—which latter body expressed its approval of them, with the condition that in the management of the proposed institution there should not be an undue preponderance of either branch of the Profession over the other. As to the Inns of Court, Committees of great weight and learning, appointed by two of them—Gray's Inn and the Middle Temple—gave in their adhesion to the main principles of those propositions; but the Committees of the other two—Lincoln's Inn and the Inner Temple—dissented from them, expressing a wish to keep their education for the Bar entirely distinct, and in the hands of the Inns of Court: and the narrower opinion eventually came to be adopted by majorities among the Benchers of all the four Societies. On the 11th of July, 1871, he moved a Resolution in the House of Commons embodying those propositions; he was supported by a Petition numerously signed by members of the Profession and, among other eminent persons, by favourable opinions from some of the leading Members of the Royal Commission of 1854. No conclusion was arrived at on that occasion. And here he begged permission to refer to a matter which was a little personal to himself. In January last, in a periodical of some note—The Quarterly Review—there was an article on this subject, which, after stating that many persons had at first expressed their concurrence with the objects of the Association to which he had referred, without understanding them, proceeded to remark— Even the venerable Lord St. Leonards sent a contribution to its funds of 300 guineas, which has not yet been returned to him— meaning, he (Lord Selborne) supposed, that faith had not been kept with that learned, excellent, and venerable man. Now what were the facts? Three 11 days after he spoke in the House of Commons and moved the Resolutions to which he had adverted, he received, unsolicited in any way whatever, this letter from Lord St. Leonards, dated the 14th of July, 1871— I have been considering the proposal to establish a Legal College, in which you take so great an interest. No one is more hound than I am to support such an institution. I request you, therefore, to put down my name as a subscriber of 400 guineas—half to the foundation, and the other half to establish a prize for merit in such a manner as you and those who act with you may direct. He felt much gratified and encouraged by the support of so eminent a person, and one so highly qualified, after considering them as he had done, to judge of and appreciate the character of the proposals which he had made. Shortly afterwards, Lord St. Leonards appeared to think that his benefaction would not be useful unless efforts were made to collect general subscriptions for the object contemplated, and on October 2, 1871, having paid the money, which was duly invested, he wrote to inquire what was doing in that respect. It was then explained to him that it was not proposed to apply to the public for subscriptions, because in the view of many of those who supported the plan it would probably be found capable of being carried into effect without subscriptions; and if they should eventually be thought necessary, it was, at all events, considered advisable to defer any effort of that kind till the principles of the scheme should have received the sanction of the Government or of Parliament. Lord St. Leonards's reply, dated the 11th of October, 1871, was this— As I have perfect confidence in you and your judgment, I wish you to act as you think right in regard to the funds in question. So matters then remained. But on the 1st March 1872, he again moved two Resolutions in the House of Commons. The Government then spoke in terms which were very encouraging as to the future, though they were not disposed to commit themselves to a vote in favour of the Resolutions at that time, and, accordingly, it was their wish that a division should not be taken; but, after consulting with those with whom he acted, it was thought proper that a division should be taken, when 103 voted for the Resolu- 12 tions, and 116, including Members of the Government, against them. He did not himself feel discouraged by that result; but the venerable Lord to whom he had referred (Lord St. Leonards) appeared to think, under those circumstances, that the foundation of the School of Law for which he had given his benefaction would have to be indefinitely postponed; and, accordingly, he wrote to say that after the division he no longer thought the scheme could be regarded as immediately practicable: he therefore suggested that it might be proper that the money should be returned to him. As soon as possible after receiving that communication—on the 4th of June, 1872—the stock in which the 400 guineas, with its accumulations, had been invested—namely, £454—was re-transferred to him; and, contemporaneously with that—on the very same day—Lord St. Leonards sent a draught for 200 guineas to be used for any purpose connected with the objects of the Legal Education Association, which he (Lord Selborne) might think proper: intimating that he then contemplated dedicating the other half of his original gift to similar purposes, in connection with the system of Legal Education conducted by the Association. Their Lordships would now see how very well informed this writer in The Quarterly Review must have been. In point of fact, the whole original benefaction was returned, and a new benefaction of half the original amount was then deliberately made for the general purposes of the Association. In 1872 his (Lord Selborne's) position became materially altered by his acceptance of the Great Seal, and he retired from the Presidency of the Association. The Government of Mr. Gladstone never had the opportunity of taking the matter up, but, of course, he (Lord Selborne) was desirous of submitting to them his scheme. He accordingly prepared a draft and circulated it—with what result he had already stated. Last year, being out of office, he introduced a Bill with such amendments as his communications with individual Benchers of the Inns of Court, and with the Council of the Incorporated Law Society, had led him to make. His noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack was good enough to a certain extent to express his views on that subject also; and with regard to one very 13 main principle of that Bill—that the education to be given in the School of Law should be comprehensive and not exclusive, and should aim at opening as far as possible the education and instruction in law to everybody who might be desirous of taking advantage of it, without any reference to the question whether it was his intention to go to the Bar or to practise as an attorney or solicitor, or not become a lawyer at all, his noble and learned Friend intimated very clearly that he, at least, did not differ from that principle. On that point also he (Lord Selborne) had been repeatedly and strangely misrepresented. It had been imputed to him and to those with whom he acted that they wished to break down the lines of demarcation which now separated the barrister from the attorney and solicitor, and to introduce the American principle of indiscriminate practice. But on every occasion on which he had the opportunity of expressing himself in public on this subject, either in Parliament or at the meetings of the Association while he was their President, he had uniformly stated, not only that this was in no way an object of the Association or of his scheme, but that his opinion was strongly and decidedly in favour of maintaining the distinction between barristers and attorneys and solicitors. As to the education of the two branches of the Profession—while he considered that the same instruction should be open to all students—it was not intended to require that any students should necessarily receive any part of their instruction from the Professors or Lecturers of the General School of Law, or go through any examination except those qualifying them for a particular line of practice. All that he contended for was that an institution like this would lose half its value if it were narrow or exclusive, and that whatever instruction was was given, whatever examinations were conducted by it, should be open to all, leaving men to choose for themselves what instruction they would receive and where they would receive it, and not attempting to draw a line between those who were preparing to be barristers or solicitors and those who were not intending to practise at all. That was his principle—that Legal Education, to be put on a proper basis, should not run narrowly into two grooves of mere pre- 14 paration for the Bar and mere preparation for attorneys and solicitors. He apprehended that was a sound view. So thought the Committee of the House of Commons in 1846. They said that a system of Legal Education to be of general advantage must comprehend and meet the wants not only of the professional, but also of the unprofessional student; that for the further education of the solicitor it would be highly advisable he should also have, even while an articled clerk, opportunities for attendance on certain classes of lectures in the Inns of Court, and also on others of a nature more special to his own profession in the Law Society of which he might happen to be a member. Mr. Lowe, before the Commission of 1854, said this— I think legal education is a much larger question than the education of the Bar or even of the Bench. I think it is exceedingly desirable that every English gentleman who is independent and whose time is at his own disposal should be educated in law to a much greater extent than is now the case. Everyone who had given his mind to this subject had taken the same view. He might quote from the well-known work of Mr. John Austin as to the inestimable advantage it would be if a sound and legal education could be acquired, as he at that time proposed, by the establishment of a Faculty of Law in this metropolis—how it would promote improvement in the form and substance of the law, in legislation, and in juridical literature. These were advantages which could only be derived from a large and comprehensive system. With respect to the present more narrow system, although during the time this question had been in agitation, the Inns of Court had added largely to their contributions and in many respects had improved their rules, increased their teaching staff, and made considerable efforts to prove themselves worthy of the exclusive position which they claimed, he was bound to tell their Lordships that, according to the information he had received, the attendance of students in the private as well as public classes had been and was declining, and so far from the scheme succeeding in proportion to the efforts made to sustain it, the result was very different. He hoped there was no man living who upon proper occasion would stand up more 15 firmly for the honour, advantage, and importance of the Bar of England than he would. Certainly no man was under greater obligations to them than he was. But he could not see, as respected the honour, advantage, or importance of the Bar of England, what could be gained by the depression or disparagement of the other branch of the Profession. That branch was much more numerous, and in its own way certainly not less important. It was entrusted with the dearest interests of society throughout the Kingdom; it comprised as a rule men of high honour and integrity—and he would have thought, if the great body of solicitors desired to have a system of Legal Education established to which those who might hereafter join their ranks should be admitted on equal terms—and 8,000 out of the 10,000 solicitors had petitioned the House of Commons in favour of the Resolutions which he proposed in 1872—that there was no body in England who had a greater interest in promoting in every way the honour, dignity, and importance of the other branch of the Profession than the Bar. If anything was to be done, he could not think it would be wisely done upon principles so narrow as those which now found favour with the Inns of Court. But he did not at all despair of progress in that quarter. In 1871 Committees appointed by two of the Inns of Court, as he had stated, expressed themselves in favour of the leading principles which he advocated. Down to 1869, compulsory examination was resisted by Lincoln's Inn; and yet, afterwards, when this Association was formed, Lincoln's Inn agreed to compulsory examination, which was now the rule. And now he wished to refer to a point upon which he had not the advantage of agreeing with his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack—namely, the expediency or inexpediency of establishing a School of Law or an Examining Body only. His noble and learned Friend spoke strongly in favour of the latter; and, undoubtedly, if that should be the decision of Parliament, there would still be advantage in applying those principles of comprehensiveness and liberality of which he had spoken, although there might be only an Examining Body. But he never had been one of those who thought there was wisdom in the attempt to divorce in a University the 16 function of examination from the function of teaching. Great care should, of course, be taken to prevent the Examiners from being chosen by or from those who conducted the teaching. But everyone who had ever admitted the importance of Legal Education in sub-stance meant that there should be not merely examinations, but also the means of good instruction in the principles of law. That the institution which he proposed to establish should be a teaching body was not an essential principle of the Bill, though it was one to which he attached importance, and he hoped their Lordships would adhere to it. He now asked their Lordships to read the Bill a first time; it was in some respects altered from the Bill of last year, upon the suggestion of the Incorporated Law Society, but its leading principles were the same. The Bill proposed to incorporate a School of Law to be governed by a Senate, partly nominated by Her Majesty, partly by ex officio members filling important positions in the Law, the principal Judges, the Law Officers of the Crown, and the President and Vice President of the Incorporated Law Society; partly by members to be nominated by the Inns of Court and the Incorporated Law Society; and partly by members to be elected by barristers and solicitors. That body was to superintend the examinations and the instructions to be given in the School of Law. No one was to be required to pass a preliminary course of instruction in that or any other school. No one was to be admitted to practise at the Bar or as a solicitor who had not passed a suitable examination in the School of Law. What certificates were to be required for qualification and for practice in each branch of the Profession were to be determined with the concurrence of those who governed that particular branch, with appeal to the Judges. Power was also given, if funds should come in, to establish a teaching system. These being the leading principles of the Bill, he now begged to present it to their Lordships.

Bill to establish a General School of Law in England presented by The Lord SELBORNE.