The Express.
London, England, 1846-11-14 00:00:00

theoretic than ours as a practicalltraining. We may
borrow with more advantage from them than they
from us. We may take from the schools of Haarlem,
Paris, or Milan, their application of the principles of
the Corpus Juris, and their learned criticism of its
contents ; but they cannot import from Westminster-
hall that lightning-like rapidity of legal judgment,
that dexterous application of facts to the law, and of
the law to facts, that amazing mastery of authorities
and decisions, which distinguish our leading advo-
cates above all others in the world.

What is wanting to give lasting value to their
efforts, and continuity to their isolated arguments;
to furnish a foundation to the edifice of their legal
learning, and a guide through its vast and various
plan, is some knowledge of the theory of general
jurisprudence. There is no fear of principles usut7-
ingon practice. The tendency is all the other way.

Such-a
study would lend a:dignity to the profes-
sion of advocate which it is in danger of losing
in the somewhat dirty details of affairs. The
consciousness that the meanest of these must be the
incarnation of a principle would often rob them of
their repulsiveness, and must in all cases diminish
their inevitable contamination.

It is clear that while the barrister's fee continues to
be an " honorarium," a something which he cannot
recover at law, he continues in a very different posi-
tion from the attorney. We should strongly depre-
cate any attempt to weaken the distinction. A
compulsory examination prior to admission at the bar
might have this effect. But the fact that there is no
such test renders the encouragement of attendance at
scientific legal lectures a duty doubly incumbent on
the Benckers of our Inns of Court. Certificates of
attendance at such lectures are, we believe, to be
required from all who shall be admitted to practice
at the bar, after a fixed date. This is a sound provi-
' sion, and quite distinct from any imposition of a
test, such as examination implies. There is no practical
inconvenience from the possible incompetency of bay-
risters. Their employment depends on those who are
proverbially careful, before entrusting a man with
work, to know that he is capable of doing it. The
attorney stands between advocate and client. He
may sometimes use disreputable agents, but he is
pretty certain not to choose incompetent ones.
At the same time, We arc not prepared to oppose,
unqualifiedly, all schemes for restoring its old signifi-
cance to the practice of keeping terms at the Inns of
Court. At present this operates merely by the impo-
sition of a small pecuniary tax, not heavy enough to
exclude poor men, though it may sometimes straiten
them in their way to the bar. The whole machinery of
this formal part of our legal education is irrational and
outworn. It belongs to a state of things which has
long since passed away. There can be no question
that, in some way or other, it might be more harmo-
nised with present practice.
But it does not appear to us, as the ease stands, that
compulsory examinations for admission to the bar
would be at all sufficient for this purpose. Attend-
ance at scientific lectures, on the other hand, may be
made compulsory with advantage. This is, strictly
speaking, part of legal education. It furnishes the
theoretic element of it, which is inevitably postponed
to the practical, if not entirely neglected in chambers.
Examinations serve only to test competence. But this
at present is sufficiently tried by the penetration of the
attorney, who pronounces on the first opinion given in
chambers, or the first demurrer argued in Bank. Na
-amination could impose any test half so severe.

PROTECTION commonly implies, and often produces,
feebleness on the part of the protected ; and we believe
that it is to the " protection" by which British hus-
bandry has been cursed for more than thirty years, that
the present backward condition of husbandry in this
country is to be traced. And when we say that the
husbandry of this country is backward, we do not
forget the Protectionist assertion, that the average
acreable produce of grain in this country is greater
than that of any other. On the contrary, we believe
that if Belgium, and a few alluvial tracts in various
other countries be excepted, that assertion is very near
to the truth.
It is not, ficcesvor, In comparison with the agricul-
ture of other countries that British husbandry lags;
but as compared with other industrial occupations in
this country. As merchants, manufacturers, mari-
ners, tradesmen, or artificers, the men of Anglo-
Saxon blood are unequalled for the indomitable perse-
verance by which they command success. In
husbandry alone, in the pursuit which of all others
the steady determination of the English character
ought to produce the best results, our industry sCCOI
paralysed.
When we become farmers, we seem to lose our
powers. Enterprise and husbandry are thought
to be such inconsistent things, that premiums
and prizes are offered by the high and mighty
of the land to those who can exhibit them in combi-
nation. Why is this? There must be some cause
for such an anomaly which lies beyond the depths, to
which the wisdom of agricultural societies has
sounded. But the truth is not, therefore, of necessity
very deep, and already the divining rods wherewith
the landed interests arc, somewhat empirically,
trying to reach the spring, indicate something of
its site. Now the great want of agricul-
ture is, to be let alone. Let husbandry become
as open to capital and enterprise as commerce
and manufactures are ; and we shall soon see British
husbandry take its station alongside the other branches
of national industry. In all other avocations men
have credit for trustworthiness, and the power of
rightly seeking their own interest. But in farming,
men are presumed to have some sinister purpose,
which, if unchecked by stringent laws and watchful
regulations, will be carried into effect, to the detriment
of the owners of the land: and these very precautions
tend to the production of the apprehended evils,
for a large class of occupiers, misled by an erroneous
system, actually suppose they can benefit themselves
at the expense of the owners of the soil; in other
words, that they can, by hard-cropping their land,
obtain unfair advantages. This is a most mischievous
delusion, yet it is one which the whole scheme of our
law of landlord and tenant, and the ordinary methods
of managing landed property, induce and perpetuate.
The capitalist trusts his property in the hands of men
who, in trade or manufactures, require to use it, with
unfailing reliance on the promptings of their sense of
interest for his safety. Three-fourths of the commercial
and manufacturing industry is carried on by means of
capital obtained in some form or other from people,
who prefer to lend it to others rather than use
it themselves, and in the vast majority of instances
the arrangement is beneficial to both parties. But in
such eases the lender is content with ascertaining the
general character for skill and honesty of the bor-
rower ; the purpose of the transaction is understood
to be a contract, an exchange of equivalents. There
is no more of favour on the one aide or obligation on
the other, than a certain sense of mutual dependence
which a common interest begets.
The capitalist makes no effort to dictate to the
hirer of capital the particular mode of its application,
or to impose, rules or conditions which, if judicious
to-day, may, from change of circumstances, become
to-morrow most injurious. When, however, we turn
to agriculture, we find all this reversed. Neither
by the law, nor by the custom of landholders, is credit
given to farmers for honestly following out an
enlightened self-interest. First, as to the law;
and we entreat attention to it, from its reference
to Ireland, as well as England. The land-
lord has the power of selecting his own tenant,
and of making such a contract as he conceives
to be for his own advantage. The strict
performance of his engagements with the land-
owner, is the condition on which the tenant
holds that which forms the foundation of his
business, and any breach of such engagements would
be an act of absolute folly. Yet the law gives the
landlord a summary power to recover his rent by
distress, to the utter exclusion of all the other credi-
tors of the tenant. This is unfair and unjust, and,