THE TRIBUNE,

Law and Lawyers.
{"character_count": 6388, "word_count": 1170, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9605000019073486], "ccnet_perplexity": [1567.5999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
emnently deserving the consideration OF tie
Bar not onlv but of the public. We extract
from it the following criticism on the Moral Oh
legations and relations of the Lawyer to which
we would especially draw attention. Mr fle'
well says:


IF il he true. as we think we have shown, thai
the condition OF the legal profession 's an indcS
of civz .ticn, then its learning, lis integrity us
character. are matters OF public concernmen'
With this view we propose 10 inquire how iar !,
now fulfils the true ends of It's institution.


Bu, let US explain what we consider those endS
IN be. We conceive them To be threefold f!'Sf
When an opinion is asked, to state the Law truly
Secondiy. When advice IS asked, to advise
Justice. And thirdly. When cooperation Is
asked, TO assist the right and oppose the wrong
If there be any further duties devolving on Il
LAWYER, we do not perceive them, and less than
these. we cannot think will satisfy the just d.
mauds of society. When lawyer is asked i''
his opinion upon purely legal question: his du :
ends with stating the law as 1t Is. In many ~
stances however, more than this is asked II
client seeks his advice respecting his future coll
duct. In such case his duty as moral beng
requires him To advise justice. His position as
legal adviser Goes not exempt him from the mora!
duties which bind other men. lie has no rHoie
right than any other friend to ADVISE what IS
unjust or oppressive. Undoubtedly the ebert
must Judge Tor himself of the moral quality Of
his own actions, and If he desires no more than
to know what course the law requires under par
tioular circumstances, the advisers Cuty en-
with explaining that. But IN practice the client
frequently expects and asks more. tic asks al
vice from "a friend vino knows what his legal
4 k.hl hoe e
confidence than any other person. In such cir-
cumstances, he is bound by moral laws, more
potent than any human will, to throw his infl,i,
ence into the scale of probty. To assent to the
bad scheme of an unjust client Is to become
equally guilty with him, and the two are as mucn
consplrators to effect wrong, az If they hs
originally concoccd II plan of iniquliy with tie
view of sharing n the plunder. When, In al
dtion to advice, the client wants an advocate,
and asks for active cooperation, the same moral
law binds him just as strongly to refrain iro'a
pursuing an unjust object. But we shall have
more 10 say OF this shortly. 1t is enough IL
present to have explained what we conceive TO 'e
the true ends OF the institution.


We will now explain wherein we think tie
profession falls short of these ends, and the rc;.-
sons oi it, which we shall consider together. The
sources of the complaints against lawyers We
conceive TO be these:


l. The maxim that they are bound to give
their assistance TO any person who may ask i',
without regard TO The justice of his case.


2. A vicious system of procedure, which CO..
demns considerable class TO mere drudgery, und
by necessary consequence, makes pecuniary
emoluncnt disproporlionate to intellectual exc
ton.


g. The tendency of legal studies and practi' c
as now pursued to make the practitioners salts
fed with existing systems without regard 10
their mperections.


To these we may add that misconCeptiOl
of the relations between the bench and the bhr,
has led to come of the PIE ludices against Il .
profession.


Fnst.-It has been said, we. k now not hoy
many times, that lawyer is not at liberty 10
refuse any one his services, and that when eiI
gagged he may properly do all he can for his cl-
ent. The great English moralist took this
= ground and supported IL by AN ingenious but
"a an imperfect argument. Lord Brougham has
l even gone so far as to say, in speech in tie
English House OF Lords, within year or two,
that the advocate is bound TO carry his zeal
for his client far, as to forget that there j.
any other person in the world besides him
and 10 lose SIGHT OF every other consideration,
thant the one OF his success.


Now to our view q more revolving doctrine
scarcely ever fell from any mans lips. We
think 1t unsound in theory and pernlcous III
practice. 1t assumes that man has right 10
whatever the law will give him, that the law


itself is 30 clear that 1t cannot be mistaken or
perverted, and that he may rghtiully avail hirl-
self of every defect in an adversarys proof which
the rules of evidence, or accident, or time, may
have caused three propositions, every one Of
I ut
this more closely. Suppose that ones client lays
claim to tract of land in the possession and
apparent township of another, whose evidence Of
title, however, has been destroyed by some acct
dent. He knows from confidential communlca-
tions, made 10 him counsel, that his client his
not just claim to the land; but from decc. Of
proof OH the part of the poSsessor, II is easy for
him TO recover it. 1.-THE client asks 1t, Is he bound
to assist hml Few persons will go so far hs
that. But # the doctrine is sound one. does II,
not embrace this case There is, as il strikes Us,
no middle path. If the advocate is IL overlook
the moral aspects of the claim, he must recover
this property for his client. Putting extreme
a Case tests the principle and shows II 10 be un-
sound, by showing that it leads to consequence
so revolving.


The law, moreover, is not SO clear and precise
but that il may be mistaken or perverted. y
strong nllnu AT thc par, ana weak one on me
BENCH lead but too often to erroneous judgments
by which honest causes iail, and good mon sutr.
The argument we are combating takes tor
granted the infallibility of judges, and the Ger
tainty of law. Who, convefsant with the pro
ceedlngs OF court does not know that neither
can be counted on2 Before ordinary tribunals,
IA great deal more depends the advocate than
most men are aware of. Truth is sometimes
difficult to find. There are advocates who


- Could make the appear


The better rcSson. 10 peFpe1 and dash


MauIest couiScis


Is it lawful 10 use this power 10 sustain bad
cause, or in the defence OF the guilty, or what Is
more dreadful, IN the prosecution OF innocence
Ii it be mans law, is it Gods viii that noble
faculties should be perverted. and learning abused,
To make false reasons seem true, TO cover up weak
points, TO give undue prominence TO some facts.
TO conceal others, tu magnify ones own cause,
to vili'y an advetsary's? The notion proceeds