Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 01.pdf/78

 Boston University Law School. the general principles which shape the com mon law may be induced; and it is insisted that to state those principles in the first instance to the pupil and then leave him to study the cases is to discourage such study, and to put the student in a position where he will take the principle for granted without induction from the decisions. The first objection is, in substance, that the

student will take the statements of the lec turer for granted. After a constant ex perience of ten years as instructor and lec turer, the writer is de cidedly of the opinion that the average law student takes nothing for granted; he is a vitalized interrogation point; and if the state ment of the lecturer is not a true and logi cal conclusion from the cases cited and the reasons given by the lecturer, he is pretty sure to be apprised of that fact by his students. If there is any force in the second objection, which is, that the DWIGHT statement of a prin ciple prevents or at least discourages inductive reasoning, then the study of geometry is a mistake, in so far as it states a proposition and requires the student to prove it. Any one who has wit nessed the recitations at the Boston Law School knows that the students study cases most critically, and often get the best of the instructors in the discussion of such cases; he knows, also, that the students are not deterred from case study by the system which prevails, but that the whole class is alive with energy and curiosity.

59

It was while the school was located in Bromfield Street that the moot courts were placed upon a more substantial basis. As finally arranged, the court consisted of three judges, one of whom was a member of the faculty, the other two being members of the senior class; of a clerk, who was required to keep his records with legal accuracy; of a sheriff and other court officers. Cases were prepared and assigned to the students for ar gument; or the stu dents were required to draw writs, to make the officers returns of service, and draw the pleadings necessary to bring the parties to an issue. All this work was made oblig atory upon the mem bers of the school; they enjoyed the ex perience greatly, and some of the clearest and most logical argu ments that the writer has ever heard have been delivered before these moot courts. Although the proceed ings are always dig nified, there is in the style of argument a FOSTER freedom which per haps would not be tolerated in some tribunals. A few years ago a case involving the law of libel was argued before the court, which had as its Chief Justice for that sitting a member of the faculty noted for his gravity and also for the works which he has given to the profession. One of the counsel in the case was an Ohio boy. He began his argument by most extravagant praise of the writings of the Chief Justice, and told in glowing lan guage how their reputation had spread over the whole West; then he paused for a mo