Law and Lawyers in Society: An Address Delivered Before the Graduating Class of the Law Department of the University of Michigan, March 28, 1866

We have spent some pleasant time together in searching out the foundations of the law. In studying its principles, you have acquired, I trust, a creditable amount of knowledge upon the special topics which are most likely to claim the attention of active lawyers .... You need never fear to aim to high. The arrow never gravitates upward. The great danger among lawyers is, that they sometimes aim to low...

Materials of Jurisprudence

This period is marked by rather more strenuous efforts than have been made before in this country, to solve the problem of condensing and simplifying the law. Our own day is peculiar in the endeavors we have seen to evolve what is claimed to be a science of jurisprudence. Some admirable writers have succeeded in dividing the domain of law into its larger or smaller fields, and have shown with more or less fulness the relative positions of these, and their mutual dependence. This is a valuable service; for all lawyers know that, without a reasonably clear perception of the place of every rule in the general scheme of law, there can be no complete understanding of any legal doctrine

Outlines of the Political History of Michigan

Written in 1876 this work was originally intended as a sketch of the political development of the State of Michigan to be used for the purposes of its Centennial Committee. Chapters span Michigan political history beginning with early explorations by France and England, colonization, French and then British rule, military conquest, the administration of colonial governors, relations with adjacent territorial entities, the last years of the Territory and the first Constitution of 1835; and lastly, Michigan under the Constitution of 1850.https://repository.law.umich.edu/books/1047/thumbnail.jp

Some Hints on Defects in the Jury System

The occasional freaks of juries have now and then led some members of the bar to speculate on the policy of doing without them entirely, and some persons no doubt think that they have strong convictions that the jury system has become useless. It is safe to say that these extreme views are altogether speculative, and not based on any careful comparison of results. Most persons who have looked into their own experience with courts and juries are ready to agree that where there is no dispute about main facts, so that the chief dispute is one of law, there is no reason why the judge should not handle the whole case. But where there are motives to be looked into, and uncertain elements to be determined, although juries sometimes make strange work, they make on the average quite as sound decisions on facts as judges. Any one who will take the trouble to investigate will find that upon questions of fact, involving any close knowledge of human nature, judges differ as much as juries, and sometimes reach remarkable results. Experience has shown (and perhaps no volumes contain sadder proofs of it than the state trials of all countries) that the pressure of public passions and prejudices, whether general or local, is often quite as visible in the rulings as in the verdict. It often happens, too, that a vigorous legal intellect is found in company with curious hobbies and freaks of judgment, which may make a very austere man apply extreme notions of criminality to venial or minor offences, or hold, on the other hand, serious wrongs to be mere harmless vagaries. The legal biographies contain some amusing illustrations of this, and the annals of criminal jurisprudence are not lacking in tragic examples of it

Materials of Jurisprudence

This period is marked by rather more strenuous efforts than have been made before in this country, to solve the problem of condensing and simplifying the law. Our own day is peculiar in the endeavors we have seen to evolve what is claimed to be a science of jurisprudence. Some admirable writers have succeeded in dividing the domain of law into its larger or smaller fields, and have shown with more or less fulness the relative positions of these, and their mutual dependence. This is a valuable service; for all lawyers know that, without a reasonably clear perception of the place of every rule in the general scheme of law, there can be no complete understanding of any legal doctrine

Annotations...Walker\u27s Chancery Reports

The occasion which has arisen for publishing a new edition of Walker\u27s Chancery Reports, renders it proper to accompany it with some notice of the Court, and of the changes which have taken place since the decision of the C\u27ases reported in this volume. The Court of Chancery, which was organized immediately on the formation of the State government, was presided over by a Chancellor, who held his courts at regular terms in, at first, three, and afterwards four different places, but with general jurisdiction over the entire State. The first Chancellor was Elon Farnsworth, a gentleman of singularly excellent qualities to become the founder of an Equity system, from his thorough training and his fairness and breadth of mind. He at once proceeded, with the aid of faithful assistants, to complete a system of Rules which were to a grt•at extent moclified or copie d from the New York Rules in Chancery, which had been shaped by the experience of Chancellor Kent and his sncce;;sors, under a body of Statutes very closely resembling those of Michigan. Chancellor Farnsworth succeeded in simplifying the practice, and in providing for a much speedier disposition of causes than had before been reached in either England or New York. The rules of admission to the Chancery Bar were so framed as to prevent the danger of incompetent practitioners, by requiring a previous admission after a three years\u27 novitiate to the Common Law Courts, and a special examination of the Attorney after his common law admission by a committee of Equity Lawyers. With well trained practitioners it was not difficult to secure the orderly transaction of business; and at the same time our Chancellors were always careful never to allow any substantial equity to be lost by the misprision of officers or counsel. The system, as applied, was a very good one, and the jurisdiction was useful. Chancellor Farnsworth\u27s decisions, previous to his resignation in 1842. are reported in Ihrrington\u27s Chancery Ueports-a second edition of which was not long since published under the careful revision of Judge Cooley. The few 1leP.isions rendered by thnt Chancellor during his brief resumption of the office in 1846 and 1847 have not been collected.https://repository.law.umich.edu/books/1013/thumbnail.jp

On the Study of Law: An Address at the Opening of the Law Department of the University of Michigan, October 3, 1859

Professor Campbell\u27s address on the occasion of the inauguration of the Department of Law at the University of Michigan, laying out the hopes for and expectations of the newly-created unit. He sweeps wide through the history of the State and the nobility of the profession: Let everyone come to the study of the Law with a proper sense of its dignity and importance

Law Abridgment: Closing Address Delivered Before the Graduating Law Class of the University of Michigan, March 20, 1879.

We hear on all sides complaints of the increasing mass of printed Reports and text-books, which it is said the lawyer must find some means of mastering, but which no life is long enough to read. The young lawyer, as he scans the dreary catalogues, and wonders what Croesus can buy or what brain can learn all this lore, is sorely puzzled what books to choose from the thousands that have found printers. And when a few years of practice have shown him how small a share of these books have done any good in the world, he is forced to consider, whether the evil can not in some way be removed. The remedy has not yet been found, and perhaps may not be, unless some great convulsion should come, which shall destroy laws altogether. This is not the relief we desire. It may be that one reason why we find no remedy is because we have no clear idea of the mischief. And while it may need some greater pressure, and some intolerable grievance, to make any of us see the true condition of affairs, I have thought it could do no harm than to spend this hour in making some suggestions on the subject.https://repository.law.umich.edu/books/1051/thumbnail.jp

Annotations...Walker\u27s Chancery Reports

The occasion which has arisen for publishing a new edition of Walker\u27s Chancery Reports, renders it proper to accompany it with some notice of the Court, and of the changes which have taken place since the decision of the C\u27ases reported in this volume. The Court of Chancery, which was organized immediately on the formation of the State government, was presided over by a Chancellor, who held his courts at regular terms in, at first, three, and afterwards four different places, but with general jurisdiction over the entire State. The first Chancellor was Elon Farnsworth, a gentleman of singularly excellent qualities to become the founder of an Equity system, from his thorough training and his fairness and breadth of mind. He at once proceeded, with the aid of faithful assistants, to complete a system of Rules which were to a grt•at extent moclified or copie d from the New York Rules in Chancery, which had been shaped by the experience of Chancellor Kent and his sncce;;sors, under a body of Statutes very closely resembling those of Michigan. Chancellor Farnsworth succeeded in simplifying the practice, and in providing for a much speedier disposition of causes than had before been reached in either England or New York. The rules of admission to the Chancery Bar were so framed as to prevent the danger of incompetent practitioners, by requiring a previous admission after a three years\u27 novitiate to the Common Law Courts, and a special examination of the Attorney after his common law admission by a committee of Equity Lawyers. With well trained practitioners it was not difficult to secure the orderly transaction of business; and at the same time our Chancellors were always careful never to allow any substantial equity to be lost by the misprision of officers or counsel. The system, as applied, was a very good one, and the jurisdiction was useful. Chancellor Farnsworth\u27s decisions, previous to his resignation in 1842. are reported in Ihrrington\u27s Chancery Ueports-a second edition of which was not long since published under the careful revision of Judge Cooley. The few 1leP.isions rendered by thnt Chancellor during his brief resumption of the office in 1846 and 1847 have not been collected.https://repository.law.umich.edu/books/1013/thumbnail.jp

Law and Lawyers in Society an address delivered before the Graduating Class of the Law Department of the University of Michigan

https://repository.law.umich.edu/books/1038/thumbnail.jp