REVIEWS
DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1949.tb00124.x |
Date | 01 April 1949 |
Published date | 01 April 1949 |
REVIEWS
INNER
TEMPLE
PUERS,
By
Sir
FRANK DOUGLAS MACKINNON.
[London:
Stevens
&
Sons,
LM.
1948.
vii
and
286
pp.
21s.
net.]
Tru
late Lord Justice MacKinnon’s earlier literary work, which largely con-
sisted of admirable editions of
Bcrutton
on
Charterpartier and
Bilk
of
Lading,
was marked by Ane scholarship and an obvious antiquarian interest in the
earlier history of those commerclal documents. The busy life of
a
commercial
court leader did not leave him much time
to
pursue
this
latter bent, but with
the greater leisure available on his promotion to the bench he began to devote
a
pd deal of time to the study of eighteenth century London and also
to
legal antiquarianism, where he worked particularly on the history of his own
Inn of Court, the Inner Temple, and on what
I
may perhaps call the more
decorative side of the life and work of the judges. Letters in the
Timu
and
notes in the
Timer
Litrmry
8uppbmsnt,
and above all in the
Law
Qwrtrrly
Izevisw, delighted
all
lawyers who had any feeling beyond the mere techni-
calities of the law and of professional work.
In this volume most of his letters and notes about Inner Temple matters
are collected, together with
a
pod deal of new materid and in particular
a
careful description of the damage done by enemy action in the Inner Temple
In
1040,
together with
a
series
of
before and after photographs which will bring
n
lump to the throat of every loyal member of the Inn. Of the othcr papers
we
may mention in particular ‘The
Lest
Revel and the Ritual of Revels’ and
‘The Old Benchers’. In Tudor and Jacobean England the Inns of Court
revels were an outstanding feature of the cultural life of London. They
survived into the eighteenth century when the last one was held in February,
1788-4,
and Sir Frank MacKinnon was able to obtaln
a
pretty detailed account
of it. The essay on the Old Benchers is already well known as
an
introduction
to an edition of Lamb’s essay of
this
title which appeared some years ago.
Those who enjoyed it then will be glad to have it here substantially amplified
with interesting new material.
It
is
hardly necessary
to
add that these essays and notes make an appeal far
wider than
to
members of the Inner Temple or indeed of the legal profession.
Those who enjoy strolling along the byeways of the past can wish for no better
guide than this urbane and whimsical judge whose pleasant and discursive
style provides
a
comfortable vehicle for
a
tour along many little-frequented
roads.
Attention should perhaps be drawn to
a
mistake in the, postscript
to
the
second chapter which deals with Roger North and his practice
at
the bar.
Sir Frank MacKinnon was concerned to show that this was due to nepotism
in
that he was much ‘briefed
to
appear before his brothers, Arst at Common
Law before the Lord Chief Justice, and then
.
. .
before the Lord Chancellor’.
The truth is that brother Francis was Arst of all Chief Justice (not Lord Chief
Justice) of the Common Pleas, and was afterwards promoted to Lord Keeper
and then Lord Chancellor. There were other brothers of considerable eminence
but none became
a
judge. This is certainly an unexpected lapse on the part
of an author whose scholarship is as
a
rule remarkably accurate.
As
a
Anal comment we may remark that there is no indication anywhere
in the book that the author hae died. His sudden death was a great shock
to
bench and bar, and
a
short
appreciation of his work in the law might
well
have prefaced this collection of his papers.
CXO.LEI.
258
254
THE MODERN
LAW
REVIEW
VOL.
12
JEREMY
BENTHAM
AND
THE
LAW.
A
Symposium. Edited by
G.
W.
KEETON
and
G.
SCHWARZENBEROER
on
behalf
of
the
Faculty
of
Laws
of
University College,
London.
[London:
Stevens
&
Sons,
Ltd.
1948.
268
pp.
20s.
net.]
IT
was a happy inspiration that Professor Keeton, Dean of the Faculty
of
Laws
of University College, Iandon, and
his
staff should commemorate by
a
sympo-
sium the two hundredth anniversary
of
the birth, on February
15,
1748,
of
Jeremy Bentham, who was a member of the first committee for the promotion of
the college, and is honoured with its founders. The volume contains thirteen
articles, eight of which were written by members of the faculty, and five by
others.
It
is the only available synopsis of Bentham’s activities in the legal
field;
a
second edition somewhat simplified and prefaced by
a
short biography
would be
a
great boon to beginners, and would make him better known in the
second half of the twentieth century than he
he
been in the first.
A
reviewer, if he is to be fair to
80
many contributions, must limit hlmself
to
a
brief reference to the content of each.
Professor Jolowicd ‘Was Bentham
a
Lawyer
?
’
is the most original of the
articles, displaying in acute observations much reading and thought, under
a
title which
is,
perhaps, happier for a lecture (the purpose for which
it
watt
written) than for an article. His emphasis is upon the insight which Bentham
displnyed in his analytical work. Much of Austin’s analysis, familiar
to
generations of students, was in truth Bentham’s, and was of great originality.
Similarly, the importance of the machinery of legislation, which
is
easily
apparent to anyone equipped with a modern manual of constitutional law,
Bentham saw for himself unaided, ‘and
to
see it in his age required
a
must
uncommon power of penetrntion through form to essence, and a remarkable
freedom from inherited ways of legal thought’.
Dr.
Margery Fry gives
a
balanced account of
‘
Bentham and English Penal
Reform
’,
showing how In his voluminous writings he elaborates on the one hand
notions about punishment which are quite absurd, and on the other projects
a
searchlight into the future showing an astonishing
‘
foreknowledge of the way
in which, after many years’ delay, penal science was to move’. Miss Fry tell8
in
a
few pages the story of the ill-fated Panopticon scheme, which more than any
other incident in Bentham’s cnreer shows how his mind was ‘most distracted
by his own fatal ingenuity’.
Dr.
Zagday gives
n
short account
of
‘
Bentham and the Poor Law
’,
stressing
his
amazing prescience.
A
comparison between the details of an ideal adminis-
tration worked out in the Constitutional Code and the hierarchy of today
culminating in the Minister of Health shows
a
remarkable similarity.
The important subjects of Benthnin’s Influence on Civil Procedure and
Evidence were entrusted to
Dr.
Zagday, Professor Keeton and Mr. Marshall.
These papers are the fruit of careful research, and
are
valuable not only
as
a
summary of Bentham’s views, but also as
a
repository of references. For
instance, attention is called
to
Denman’s article in the
Edinburgh
Review
in
le24,
an important link between Bentham’s criticisms
of
the existing law and
the
later Evidence Acts.
Professor Graveson’s article, strangely named
‘
The Restless Spirit of English
Law’, takes it place appropriately if regarded as what it in fact is, namely,
a
survey of Bentham’s influence on English private law. Within its obligatory
limits it could hardly be better. But
I
most register
a
preference for Sir
Arnold McNair’s description of the eighteenth century as ‘one of the most
creative periods of our law’
(Dr.
Johnson
and
the
Law,
p.
I),
as
against
Professor Graveson’s description of it
as
‘
notably conspicuous for its almost
complete lack of legal reform and legnl development’. Incidentally, the
attribution (of which
I,
too, have been guilty) to the influence of Bentham of
the limited liability of companies seems to lack confirmation at present. The
idea was not Bentham’s own.
It
was at least
as
old as an Irish statute to
To continue reading
Request your trial