cations of the Imperial University matriculants and others. Besides, the candidates for admission to the Law College of the Imperial Universities must have passed examinations in two European languages; in some private law schools this is not required.

Nevertheless the desire of Japanese students to enter the Imperial Universities is so great that applicants for admission to the preparatory course of the High Schools-of which there are at present eight-annually exceed the capacity of those schools by many hundreds. Only one-third of the applicants win admission through competitive examination. Last year the candidates for admission to the Law College of Tokio Imperial University numbered 590, and it was necessary to reject the 90 who showed on examination comparative deficiency in any one of the three languages, English, French, or German. The popularity of the Imperial University among young men may be explained when we come to speak of the careers of that school's graduates. Last year the undergraduate law students of the Tokio Imperial University at the end of the academic year numbered 2,128, besides 432 taking post-graduate courses.

IV. Courses of Instruction ·

Courses of instruction differ somewhat in the different schools, but I will take that of the Imperial University of Tokio. Here subjects for lectures and examinations fall into the two classes, Compulsory and Elective. Compulsory subjects are:

The Constitution;

The Civil Code;

The Commerical Code;

The Code of Civil Procedure;

The Criminal Code;

The Code of Criminal Procedure;

Administrative Law;

Public International Law;

Private International Law;

The History of Legal Institutions; Jurisprudence;

Roman Law;

English, French, or German Law;
Political Economy.

Elective subjects are:

The Comparative History of Legal Institutions;

The Law of Bankruptcy;
The Science of Public Law;
Maritime Law.

The course extends over four years; in the law schools of private establishment the course covers only three years. At the end of each year the student is examined in writing on the work of the year. After having passed four such examinations, he is required to present himself for a graduation

examination, in which he is catechised orally on all the subjects studied during the four years' course.

V. Graduates-Privileges and Careers

It is now more than thirty-six years since the special course of law was founded in the Imperial University, and the number of graduates now exceeds 3,000.

A graduate of the Imperial University College of Law receives the title "Hogakushi," corresponding to "Bachelor of Law." A postgraduate course leads to the degree of "Hogaku-hakushi," or "Doctor of Law." Graduates of the Imperial Universities' Law Colleges are accorded certain privileges and advantages, among which are these:

(1) They may be appointed "Hannin," or "Lower Officials," without civil service examination.

(2) They may become candidates for civil service examination for the rank of "Higher Official," without first passing the preliminary examinations required of other candidates.

(3) They may be appointed assessors or candidate judges without examination.

(4) They may become advocates and practice at the bar without taking the bar examinations.

Enjoying such advantages as these, and having received the highest type of instruction in the highest seat of learning in the land, the graduates of the Imperial University naturally form a most influential class. Many of their number have already been called to most important positions. Here is a list, made at the end of the last academic year, showing the occupations of these graduates so far as is known:

Judges and prosecutors.
Administrative officials..

.544

.721

To give an idea of the positions which these graduates are filling, I may mention such facts as that two became Cabinet Ministers; that the present vice ministers of the Departments of the Imperial Household, Foreign Affairs, Home Affairs, the Treasury, Justice, and Education, all are graduates; that the majority of the members of Japan's diplomatic service are graduates, among them four ambassadors and four ministers; and that nearly half of the governors of provinces are graduates of the Law College of the Imperial University.

VI. Legal Education and Legislation

And now to take a glance at some of the wider influences of legal education in Japan. In every land legal education and legislation stand in mutual relations of cause and effect. Education in the principles of law naturally influences legislation, yet it often happens that the system of legal education is based on and follows the footsteps of the country's legislation.

Especially will the latter be the case when a sudden and sweeping social and political revolution has to crystallize itself in a new body of law. The law will, as it were, spring into being, and education in it will for a while be less the search for creative juridical principles than the study of how to interpret and apply aright the principles which have been suddenly embraced. In the first years following such a revolution, legal education will cease to instruct the lawmakers what they should do, and will apply itself to learn what the lawmakers have done.

This is exemplified in the legal history of Japan. The promulgation of the old Taiho code of 702 A. D. was the result of such a social and political revolution, following the introduction of Chinese culture into Japan. That code was framed upon Chinese law. It was not the product of native legal education; indeed, it was the necessity of interpreting and applying the new code that brought about the beginning of legal education in the University Bureau of the Department of Ceremony.

With even greater force does the above remark apply to the development of legal education in Japan following the opening of the country to the Western culture. The new body of legislation that suddenly appeared upon the Restoration of the Imperial Government was not the creation of, but became the subject of study of, Japanese jurists.

However, so rapidly did legal education progress and I may say, so broad was the outlook of the pioneers of the new jurisprudence, so zealous was their search throughout the world for just principle and sound practice that it was not long before a new school of native jurists realized their own competency to make laws for their country. The Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1880, framed by Professor Boissonade, has been entirely revised by Japanese jurists. Professor Boissonade's Civil Code of 1890, and the Commercial Code of 1890 by Professor Von Roesler, a German jurist, were completely revised before they went into operation.

In the work of these revisions, our jurists gathered and collated materials from all countries of the civilized world. The framers of the Civil Code of 1896 and 1898, for instance, collected more than 30 of the world's civil codes, besides great masses of statutes, reports, and treaties out of which they se

lected the principles and rules of practice and procedure which they deemed best adapted to the peculiar requirements of Japan. In some parts, for instance, rules were adapted from the French Civil Code; in others the principles of the English common law were followed: in others again such laws as the Swiss Code of Obligation of 1881, the new Spanish Civil Code of 1889, the Property Code of Montenegro, the principles of the Indian Succession and Contract Acts, of the Civil Codes of Louisiana, Lower Canada, or the South American Republics, and the draft Civil Code of New York were consulted, the first and second drafts of the new German Civil Code furnishing especially valuable material. The revision of the Commerical Code of 1899, the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1890, and the new Criminal Code of 1907, proceeded on the same method, so that the new Japanese codes may be said to be fruits of comparative jurisprudence.

Now, such being the character of Japanese law, it is clear that its study and teaching must proceed on the comparative method. This method of framing the codes has a determining influence on the method of legal education in Japan. So, although Japanese law is now made the basis of instruction, the tripartite division into English, French, and German sections is still maintained, and in each section English, French, and German law is taught in addition to Japanese law. According to my information, the English section in the Imperial University of Tokio is taught by Professor Terry, formerly of the faculty of Yale; the French section by Professor Bridel, professor in the University of Geneva; and the German section by Dr. Loenholm, a German judge.

VII. The "Postponement Campaign"

I can hardly close this address without tracing a little further the mutual relations of legislation and legal education in Japan, nor, particularly, without a reference to an incident, somewhat entertaining perhaps, and certainly not without real interest to students of the history of law.

I have spoken of the fact that study of the law must often follow the footsteps of the lawmakers. Now we come to the other side. Legislation is often determined by the character of a country's law schools.

We saw the rise in Japan of two schools of law-one, in the Imperial University of Tokio, English; the other, in the Department of Justice, French. I did not mention it, but in fact there were also two private schools of English law (Hogaku-in and Tokio Senmon Gakko), and two private schools in which French law was taught (Meiji Horitsu Gakko and Wafutsu Horitsu Gakko). Later, a German Law Section came into existence in the University.

This state of things could not, and did not,

fail to produce an interesting effect on the country's legal history. The graduates of the English Law Section of the Imperial University and other schools where the English principles were studied imbibed the doctrines of Bentham, Austin, and Maine, and most of them adhered to the school of Positive Law, while the graduates of the French Section and the other French schools held the tenets of the believers in Natural Law. It was inevitable that doctrines with which the students had been impressed at school should strongly influence their views as to legislation in later days. And thus arose among the jurists, lawyers, and legislators of Japan two contending schools.

The contest came in 1890 on the question of accepting or postponing for revision the Civil and Commercial Codes, the former of which was prepared by Professor Boissonade, who, as I have said, taught French law in the Department of Justice. By this date there was a large number of graduates both of government and private law schools who had already filled important positions at the bar and on the bench, as well as in other prominent capacities.

Many causes conspired to render pressingly necessary comprehensive legislation and radical reforms of law. The new conditions consequent on the opening of the country to foreign intercourse after centuries of isolation; the abolition of the feudal system, and the resultant necessity of centralization; the desire to abolish the extraterritorial jurisdiction wielded on Japanese soil by foreign powers-a thousand things made imperative the swift preparation of new codes of law. A Criminal Code and a Code of Criminal Procedure were promulgated in 1880, and a Revised Code of Criminal Procedure and a Code of Civil Procedure ten years later, all of which went into operation without much opposition. But when the question came on the going into effect of the Civil and Commercial Codes of 1890, especially of the former, the jurists who had studied English law in the Imperial University or in England or America raised their voices demanding that the date fixed for their going into operation should be postponed, with a view to their complete revision. Those jurists, on the other hand, whose training had been in French law, rallied to the support of the attacked codes, urged the imperative necessity of swift action, and insisted on the date originally appointed. The German section men, then few in number, were divided.

To outsiders, this "Postponement Campaign," as it is known, may seem like a mere sectarian campaign between the English and French groups of Japanese lawyers. In truth it ought to be eminently interesting to scientific observers of legal history, for it was really a contest of the Historical School of Law, represented by the English-trained lawyers, with the French School of Natural Law. It resembled in many respects the fa

mous controversy between Savigny and Thibaut, in the beginning of the same century, over the necessity of a general civil code for Germany. The question involved the important issue as to which theory of law should dominate the future legislation and jurisprudence of the country.

The "Postponement Campaign" was successful. After warm debates in both Houses of the Imperial Diet in 1892, the operation of the Civil Code was delayed until the last day of the year 1896, and in 1893 a codification committee was formed, under the presidency of Prince (then Marquis) Ito. Its members— all Japanese-were carefully chosen to represent all schools of legal thought, and the draft of the revised civil code, which was in reality a new compilation, was prepared by three professors of the Imperial University, of whom one represented English and German Law and belonged to the Postponement party; the second represented French Law and also belonged to the Postponement party, and the third represented French and German Law and belonged to the Anti-Postponement party.

One is happy to be able to say that, though the contestants in this fierce juristic battle were, while the contest raged, doughty champions of the teachings of their law-school days, when the battle was over they joined hands heartily in the work of proving to the nation that there had been worked out, even in their strife, a code of laws that would promote the welfare of country and people.

VIII. Conclusion

Such, then, is a most imperfect sketch of the history of legal education in Japan, and its present condition. I wish I could have made my story more worthy of the importance of the subject, for, though the law and education may not afford very dramatic or picturesque incidents, on nothing does a nation's happiness more substantially depend than upon its system of justice and the competency of those who administer it.

Some of us believe that the training up of "men learned in the law" forms one of the most creditable achievements of modern Japan. It was the swift advance of legal education that in large part enabled our government to insist with justice on the abolishment of extraterritoriality-one of the most serious difficulties she met in winning a decent and proper place in the family of civilized nations.

It is the result of this rapid progress in legal knowledge that enables us to point to our Supreme Court, 7 Courts of Appeal, 350 District and Local Courts, with 1,241 judges, 424 public prosecutors, and more than 2,000 lawyers actively practicing before those courts-all of them well educated and qualified in the law. This, coupled with the diffusion of legal knowledge among the general public, gives the administration of justice in

Japan that high, serious, and trustworthy character which marks it in the lands of highest civilization, but which perhaps no other people have attained in so short a time. When we remember that we have attained it only through an infinite debt to so many other nations, you may well believe that we recognize one of the many ties that bind us to the great brotherhood of men-that we desire nothing more than to contribute our own little part, if it might be, that the better understanding and administration of justice, international as well as internal, may be secured, to the benefit of all mankind.

In concluding, I want to express to the of ficers and members of your distinguished Association my most sincere thanks for your kind indulgence in having given me the opportunity of making good this year my unfulfilled promise of last year, and for the cordial reception which you have accorded me to-day.

have the honor to report progress. During the past year our work has come to a head, and the present results can be amply seen in the prospectus of the series of publications, copies of which have been distributed at this meeting.

No further statement of our work is now needed. We merely take this opportunity to urge once more upon the members of the various faculties here represented that they show an active interest in these translations when issued, and use all due efforts to make them useful to the students.

John H. Wigmore, Chairman.
Charles H. Huberich,
Ernst Freund,
Ernest G. Lorenzen,
Wm. E. Mikell,

Members of the Committee.

Report of the Executive Committee

C. H. Huberich, of Stanford University Law School, presented the following report on behalf of the Executive Committee:

The Committee after full deliberation makes the following recommendations:

1. That hereafter, at the close of the first session of each annual meeting of the Association, an informal reception to the Executive Committee and a smoker be held to facilitate personal acquaintanceship among the delegates.

2. That the application of the University of Oklahoma School of Law is approved, and it is recommended that said school be admitted to membership in the Association.

3. It is further recommended that the consideration of all other applications so far made for membership be indefinitely postponed.

[Signed] William R. Vance.

George P. Costigan, Jr.
C. H. Huberich.

William S. Curtis.

On motion the report was accepted

and its recommendations adopted.

Report of the Committee on Study of Legal Philosophy and Jurisprudence

We have the honor to submit the report of the Committee on the Study of Legal Philosophy and Jurisprudence, appointed at the meeting of 1910.

The work done during the past year can be sufficiently seen from the prospectus, recently printed, and now distributed at this meeting, of the series of translations on Legal Philosophy and Jurisprudence.

There is nothing at this time to add to the matters mentioned in the prospectus. The Committee will merely take this opportunity to urge upon the various members of the faculties here represented their personal interest in these works as published, and their endeavors to enlist the interest of students in the study of this subject. John H. Wigmore, Chairman. Ernst Freund,

Ch. H. Huberich,

Albert Kocourck,

Ernest G. Lorenzen,

Roscoe Pound,

Members of the Committee.

New Officers

On the recommendation of the Nom

Your Committee on the Study of Legal History, appointed at the meeting of 1909,

the Harvard University Law School. was elected President, and George P. Costigan, Jr., of the Northwestern Uni

versity Law School, was elected Secretary and Treasurer, of the Association for the ensuing year.

William R. Vance, of the Yale Law School; William S. Curtis, of the St. Louis Law School; and William D.

'HE Section of Legal Education of

THE

the American Bar Association met in the Walker Building, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, Mass., on August 30 and 31, 1911. Owing to the death of Geo. M. Sharp, of Maryland, chairman of the Section, and to the absence of Simeon E. Baldwin, who was appointed to act as chairman, the meeting was called to order by Henry Wade Rogers, of Connecticut. In the absence of Chas. M. Hepburn, of Indiana, secretary of the Section, Edward S. Thurston, of Illinois, was elected secretary pro tem.

The following paper, prepared by C. La Rue Munson, of Pennsylvania, in memory of Judge Sharp, was read:

In Memoriam

The Honorable George Matthews Sharp, LL. D. I am permitted to write of your late chairman in a personal way rather than to discuss in any detail the work he so well performed for the cause of Legal Education; this for the reason that, with one exception, no other person now living knew him so well or bore toward him such intimate personal relations extending over a period of thirtyeight years. In September, 1873, we entered as chums at the Yale Law School, and two years later were called to the bar of our respective states, and during all the following years saw much of one another and preserved a friendship which closed only with his death a few weeks ago. As a personal tribute I may be permitted to say that I am well

persuaded to believe that my youthful character was much fashioned and directed by the high standards my friend ever set before me, both by example and precept. He was always the ideal gentleman, and of him as a student, as a lawyer, and as a judge it can well be said that he was "Sans peur et sans reproche." Such men as he are always the leaders in the high ethical qualities which make the great lawyer and the irreproachable jurist. It was this well-developed sense of ethics, coupled with his belief in the necessity for high standards for admission to our profession, which led him to take so active a part in the formation of this section and in its subsequent development and success.

George Matthews Sharp came of good Quaker ancestry. His father, the late. Dr. A. P. Sharp, was of an old Virginia family and the founder of the leading chemical house of Sharp & Dohme, and to which his fame as a great chemist gave prominence. His maternal descent was from the Matthewses, whose home in Hartford County, Maryland, has continued in that family for generations. The late Mr. Justice Stanley Matthews was his cousin, and with him he maintained for many years the most cordial and intimate relations. He was born in Baltimore on November 17, 1851, and, receiving a primary education in private schools, completed his secular education in Loyola College, subsequently entering the service of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad for a short time. His tastes leading him in another direction, he entered the Yale Law School with the class of 1875, and at a time when that now well-known institution was emerging from a period of decadence following a brilliant earlier history. The members of that class, as well as their successors, could not fail to be impressed with the selfsacrificing labors of those who did so much to bring that School of Law to its present eminent position; their survivor there now being the distinguished Governor of Connecticut, whose title of Professor Baldwin spelis