cultivated to discern and understand sound legal theory and philosophy. Theory and practice have never, therefore, been severed, but the one has been the handmaid of the other. "Heaven does with us as we with torches do, Not light them for themselves; for if our virtues Did not go forth of us, 't were all alike As if we had them not. Spirits are not finely touched, But to fine issues, nor Nature never lends The smallest scruple of her excellence, But, like a thrifty goddess, she determines Both thanks and use." Heartily glad are all the instructors in this School that the torches here lighted have not been lighted for themselves, but have shone out to guide many a troubled wanderer, and save from many a fall. And as to men here trained, their virtues have "gone forth" of them, and they have returned in abundant tribute "both thanks and use." Such have been the purposes and ideals of Columbia College Law School from its origin down to the present time. Its external history is briefly told. It was first established in 1858, and Professor Theodore W. Dwight, who prior to that time had been a professor of law in Hamilton College, was placed in sole charge of the department of instruction in municipal law. The School found its first home in the Historical Society building, at the corner of Second Avenue and Eleventh Street. Afterwards, as the number of students increased from year to year, it was removed, first to 37 Lafayette Place, a few years later to 8 Great Jones Street, and finally, after a few years more, to the grounds of Columbia College on East 49th Street, where it has since been located. Until 1873 the entire work of instruction in every topic of private law devolved upon Professor Dwight, as did also the business management of the School to a very large extent, and also the enlargement and supervision of the library, etc. But notwithstanding this great amount of labor undertaken by him, he did not seem overburdened by it, and it was not until 1873 that he was in any measure relieved of these manifold duties. In that year the writer of the present article became Instructor in Municipal Law, and took charge of some of the topics in this department. This office of Instructor was changed in 1875 to that of Assistant Professor of Municipal Law, and since that time there have been several new professorships created and various changes in their incumbents. Thus in 1878 five professorships were established: (1) of the Law of Contracts, Maritime and Admiralty Law; this has been held by Professor COLUMBIA COLLEGE LAW SCHOOL. 3 Dwight down to 1891; (2) of Real Estate and Equity Jurisprudence, held by Professor John A. Dillon from 1878 to 1882, and by Professor Benjamin F. Lee, from 1882 to 1890; (3) of Criminal Law, Torts, and Procedure, held by Professor George Chase from 1878 to 1891; (4) of Constitutional History and International Law, held by Professor John W. Burgess till the present time; (5) of Medical Jurisprudence, held by Professor John Ordronaux till the present. Of late years, also, much valuable work, especially in the way of reviews, has been done by Prize Tutors, of whom there are three, each of whom is elected for three years. The full course of study in the School occupied until very recently a period of two years, but in 1888 it was determined to extend the limit to three years, and the class which graduates this year (1891) has been the first to come under this new regulation. For many years (from 1860 to 1877) the diploma given by the Law School, and conferring the degree of LL. B., entitled its recipient to admission to the bar of New York State, but since 1877 the law has undergone a change in this respect, and an applicant for admission to the bar must undergo an examination before the Supreme Court, which is conducted by a committee of lawyers appointed by the court. During its early career, also, students were admitted to the Law School without any preliminary examination, but for many years past such an examination has been required, and has been useful in excluding a class of students too poorly qualified for legal study. By thus guarding the portals of the School as to those seeking entrance, and by subjecting candidates for a degree upon graduation to a careful and rigid examination, which must be passed to obtain such degree, the constant effort has been to elevate the standard of instruction and to make the degree more valuable. The success of the Law School, if this be judged merely by the numbers in attendance, has been very noteworthy. The entire number of students who have been connected with it from 1858 to 1891 exceeds 10,000. Among the lawyers of the New York City bar, fully one third have been members of this School. And in the New York Bar Association, which is one of the leading organizations of lawyers in this country, graduates of this School form the majority of its membership, if the older members who were admitted to the bar before the Law School came into existence are excluded from the count. And, moreover, not a few of the graduates have won for themselves high distinction, not simply in the practice of their profession, but also in judicial positions, as ministers to foreign countries, as members of Congress and of State legislatures, etc. For an institution which is yet but little more than thirty years old, this has been well called a remarkable record. But the chief distinctive feature of this Law School has been its method of teaching. This it is which more than anything else has attracted such a multitude of students from year to year. The principles and reasons upon which the method is based seem too plain and simple to even admit of question. "The reason of the law is the life of the law," says an old maxim. Hence the law must be taught by vividly impressing upon the student's mind the reasons upon which legal rules and doctrines are based. He should be so instructed that he will view the law as a system of principles, not as a mere aggregation of cases. He comes to the study of law wholly unacquainted with technical legal words and phrases, unversed in legal modes of thought or construction, and to awaken his interest, stimulate his powers, and inform his mind, whatever is taught him must be adapted to his comprehension and must be presented in a form attractive to his mind. The fallacy that one who knows a particular subject well can teach it well is far too rife in our colleges and other educational institutions. Oftentimes such a man seems to lose all comprehension of the difficulty which such a subject had for his own mind when he first began its study, and so he never can get into close contact with the minds of his pupils, nor make for them the crooked places straight. A teacher must be able not simply to acquire knowledge but also to impart knowledge. He must realize that for students who come to the study of what is for them a new and untried branch of learning, simplicity and clearness of statement are essential above all things else. He must understand and ever realize what is their power of comprehension and adapt himself to their needs. He must remember that what seems simple to him may be far from simple to them. Nor must he suppose, as do some instructors, that he is lowering his standard of mental elevation, by cultivating simplicity and directness of statement. Professor Huxley has well said that to write the primer of a science one must be master of the science. No teacher of law, for example, can fail to remember the days of labor which it has at times cost him to frame a simple definition or to state a single legal principle clearly and accurately. Professor Dwight's art of teaching has been the best illustration conceivable of these principles. He must himself see things clearly, and they must all fall into their proper relations before his mental vision, or else his mind can never rest satisfied. Hence questions of difficulty and perplexity are closely scanned by him on all sides, are subjected to the keenest analysis which the powers of his mind can bring to bear upon them, are examined in all their relations with other subjects, till at last he comes out of darkness into light. Then however abstruse may be COLUMBIA COLLEGE LAW SCHOOL. 5 the topic, however complex may be its elements, he states it so simply and clearly, that the veriest tyro in the law can comprehend it, if not in full measure, still up to the full limit of his own capacity. So the happiest faculty of clear exposition is brought to bear upon it, and the charm of felicitous illustration is added, that the way to the student's mind may be most easily and effectually won. What has just been said brings to view other principles, also, of the method of instruction which Professor Dwight has always pursued, and of which he has become so widely famed a master. That the rules and doctrines of the common law must be deduced from the decisions of the courts is matter of rudimentary legal knowledge. But shall, therefore, the student who knows little or nothing of law, and does not understand the rules of legal interpretation and construction, be set at work immediately upon the reported cases and told to deduce the principles of law therefrom by himself? Is this the better way, or is rather the trained jurist, who has had years of study and experience in the law, better qualified than the student to deduce the principles from the cases, to arrange these principles in their orderly philosophical relations, and to present them in proper systematic form? At the Columbia School, during its past history, the latter view has been approved as the wisest and soundest. Therefore the method of study has been to select a treatise upon some particular legal topic, written by some expert in that subject or by some eminent jurist, and to assign a suitable portion of this from day to day for the student to commit to memory. Herein he finds the principles of law deduced for him from the study of the reports and statutes by one who is much better qualified than himself for this task. He finds these principles stated in orderly arrangement and classification, so that he may properly appreciate their due significance. He studies legal rules in their proper order of relative succession, and in their proper relations to a comprehensive system, instead of viewing them separately and independently. So the labor of days or weeks by an author in the study of individual cases is happily presented to the student in brief and compact form, and in a mode of statement much more accurate and reliable than he would probably have attained by himself from his own study of the decisions. Then the student, after this preliminary study of the treatise, comes before the professor for recitation. He is called upon individually to recite, and thus feels a sense of responsibility that he may be able to exhibit his knowledge of the subject and state it accurately. The professor then seeks with all the stores of his experience and learning, and by clear illustration, to resolve whatever difficulties may have been experienced by the student in his study of the book, or by the class as a whole. In this way the largest measure of assistance which can be given by the able text-writer and by the experienced professor is afforded to the student's need. This method does not, moreover, exclude the reading of cases by the student, but encourages and requires it, to supplement and illustrate the teachings of the treatise. In this way the study of the reports falls into its proper place, and becomes an aid and a help instead of a source of perplexity and bewilderment. Professor Dwight's career has exhibited the success and fruitfulness of his method most abundantly. His students have been enthusiastic while they have been under his charge, and when they have gone out into the walks of active life, they have retained their admiration for his teaching and their affection for him as a man. The graduates of the school have passed, these many years, at once into the practice of their profession, and brought their legal training at once to the test of practical experience. But they have continued to testify, down to the present, and whether they belong to the earliest classes or to the latest, that their legal training, when brought to the test, has not been found wanting. Any educational institution and any instructor may justly take pride in such results. But the history of Columbia Law School would be incomplete if the instructors who have been associated with Professor Dwight did not testify to their experience in their joint labors with him. He has been to them the kindest and truest of friends. A true lover himself of mental independence and of freedom of thought and action, it has been his pleasure that they should be of the same mould as himself in this respect. He has aided them by advice and counsel, has delighted to promote their success, and to cultivate to the utmost their powers as instructors, but has always left to them, in their relations with their classes, the fullest liberty. They have always enjoyed, equally with himself, the right of private and independent judgment, and in consultation with them as a faculty, he has ever called for the frankest statement of their opinions, and has given such opinions their just weight in counsel. Hence the members of the faculty have been bound together in the strongest bonds of harmony and friendship. Happier relations of instructors towards each other, and of their students towards them, have never, it may be justly said, been maintained and cherished in any institution. It can but bring sadness to us all, as teachers and students, that this happy life and these cherished relations are now to come to an end. But Professor Dwight's life has been inseparably bound up with the life |