teaching staff, should be added. The institution of Boards of Studies, of which some at least of the teaching staff should be members, would also be required. These Boards would, of course, be subject to the ultimate control of the governing body constituted as above suggested. In order to provide the necessary funds, the minimum contributions to be made by each of the Inns should be fixed. It is tempting to show, by giving names, how strong such a governing body might now be made, but for obvious reasons the temptation must be resisted. A proper building would be required, as the present system of going in successive terms from Inn to Inn is most inconvenient, and in some cases the accommodation provided is both uncomfortable and inadequate even for the numbers at present attending the lectures. It would not be necessary to complete the whole building at once, provided that it was so planned as to admit of extension as the school grows in numbers and in efficiency. A Royal Charter would be the best means of incorporation, unless it is found that the financial arrangements cannot be made without the intervention of an Act of Parliament. The arrangement of the courses of study, the numbers and constitution of the teaching staff, and the exact powers to be conferred upon the new authority, are subjects for subsequent discussion. The first step is to get a sufficiently strong and sufficiently instructed authority, with reasonable resources at its command, to undertake the necessary duty, and that this authority should be in close touch both with the legal profession and with the academic life of the country. It is essential for the Central Law School of the Empire to be near to the Courts of Justice, and in or near one of the Inns of Court. Their splendid libraries are even now available for students. It should have a definite habitation, but it would be absurd to place that habitation, say, at Kensington. It is far better that such a school of law should be established on an independent basis than merely to rank as one of a number of heterogeneous teaching bodies which happen to be situate within a certain radius of Charing Cross, acknowledging a central authority at the Imperial Institute or Burlington House. No one can predict what will be the future of the newly constituted London University; many conflicting interests will have to be considered before it is in working order. The establishment of a great school of law is a question which affects the whole country, and to some extent the whole empire. Other universities will be affected by it, and ought to have some influence in its constitution and its proceedings. It has been truly pointed out that it would be a calamity if any step were taken "which might lessen or impair the connection between the Bar and the older universities." The position of the growing colleges of northern England situate in great mercantile communities, in the centre of a population greater even than that of London, ought not to be ignored. The bold course is the right one. Constitute an authority not dependent on a single university, but one fairly representative of the academic life of the country as well as of both branches of the legal profession. Let it appoint teachers, arrange the courses of study, and institute the examinations. Let it be known that men who choose to devote their lives to the study and teaching of such subjects as Constitutional Law, Comparative Jurisprudence, Roman or International Law, will have their efforts recognized and position assured under a responsible council instead of having their work cut short by some sudden caprice. Above all, let those who are appointed to undertake the direction of legal education believe in their work, intend that it shall succeed, do their best to encourage those who will have to undertake the task of teaching, and refrain from depreciating what may be accomplished—at all events until acquainted with the facts. It is of course absurd to suppose that attendance at lectures or classes will of itself qualify a man for the practice of his profession without reading in chambers, or working in a solicitor's office, but it may give a grasp of principles, help him to arrange in better order what he learns, and probably to learn more quickly when he comes to deal with actual practice. The more systematic study of law with some approach to scientific method may not at present enable a man to win cases so effectively as the knack of adroitly suggesting "matters of prejudice." It may seem to some of less practical importance when the domain of law is being gradually encroached upon by what is called "judicial discretion," but to others this tendency is an additional reason for advocating such study. It may not improbably improve the quality of the arguments addressed to the courts, and even affect the character of the judgments themselves in which the law is laid down, making them more terse, more logical in arrangement, more enlightening. The great judgments which really assist the adviser in predicting the action of tribunals, which give an element of certainty and confidence in the administration of the law and guidance to conduct, are precisely those which a teacher will choose to place before his pupils, not only as authoritative statements of the law but as examples of the best method of handling legal problems, and of exact expression of legal principles. ALFRED HOPKINSON. II. THE LAW OF THE BOOK OF MORMON. THE HE Book of Mormon constitutes the scriptures of one of the least educated sects of Christendom. Its doctrines have several times come before the United States courts, once before the English courts. The book was first * Hyde v. Hyde (1866), L.R. 1 P. & M. 130. published in 1830, and there have been numerous reprints, generally at Salt Lake City, or Liverpool, apparently the head-quarters in Europe of "The Latter Day Saints." The earlier editions are not divided into verses. Such division was first made by Orson Pratt, and is adopted in later editions. Another book of quasi-authority, something like the Talmud in respect of the Old Testament, is The Book of the Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Jesus of Latter Day Saints selected from the Revelations of God (1st ed., 1833). In addition much information may be found in two works by Elder George Reynolds.* From Elder Reynolds are derived the following brief statements of history. "The Book of Mormon is the record of God's dealings with the peoples of ancient America from the age of the building of the Tower of Babel to 421 years after the birth of Christ." † "There inspired record closes ; thenceforth we have nothing but uncertain tradition until the veil was withdrawn by the discovery of America."‡ Mormon was said to have been born in A.D. 311. The word is also the name of the region near the city of Lehi-Nephi, supposed to have been in the modern Ecuador. The genesis of the book is thus described. Joseph Smith, when a youth of eighteen, in 1823, was directed by an angel appearing in a vision to dig up certain brass plates deposited at Cumorah, near Palmyra in the State of New York. They were in the "reformed Egyptian" tongue, § and were translated by Smith, the first page of the Book of Mormon containing an authentication of the matter by witnesses who alleged that they had seen the plates. After Smith had translated them they were returned to Moroni, the son of Mormon, who is supposed to still have the custody of them. The work is really a plagiarism by Smith from an earlier historical The Story of the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City, 1888); Dictionary of the Book of Mormon (ibid., 1891). + Reynolds' Story, ad init. § Mormon, chap. iv. p. 8. ‡ Dictionary, p. 250. romance by one Spalding. It is divided into several books, called by the names of those who were feigned to have carried on the records of the nation by successive writings on the plates, eg. Nephi, Alma, Mormon, Moroni, etc. Most of the names are philologically impossible. The grammar is sometimes defective, and Americanisms and modern English phrases are not uncommon. Examples are "revelator," "horrible scene," "awful scene," "critical time," "hefted," "dissenters," "establish a church," "I the Lord God delighteth," all perhaps a little beneath the dignity of scripture professing to be inspired. It is hardly necessary to treat at length the long and wearisome story of the mythical Asiatic people who under the name of Nephites were supposed to have been the earliest colonists of America. Suffice it to say that there are five periods, (1) a kingdom, (2) a republic under judges, (3) anarchy, (4) Messianic dispensation, (5) second anarchy. The greatest of the lawgivers was King Mosiah who, in addition to the encouragement of agriculture,* proclaimed a constitution, the main points of which are to be extracted from various parts of the Book of Mormon and the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. It bears traces of the hand of a citizen of the United States. There was no privileged class. Slavery was unknown. The king or judge had no council or parliament. Salaried judges were elected for life or during good behaviour, the election being probably viva voce by acclamation. They had to take an oath of office, and to judge according to the Mosaic decalogue, which was adopted en bloc. No jury was used. A writ of false judgment lay to a kind of Court of Delegates. The words are rather curious. If your higher judges do not judge righteous judgments, ye shall cause that a small number of your lower judges should *Mosiah, chap. iv. p. 3. Elder Reynolds calls him the Moses or Alfred the Great of his age. The salary of a judge was one gold senine a day, equivalent to one silver senum. |