The Path of the LawWord文档格式.docx

The Path of the LawWord文档格式.docx

《The Path of the LawWord文档格式.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《The Path of the LawWord文档格式.docx（35页珍藏版）》请在冰点文库上搜索。

then,isprediction,thepredictionoftheincidenceofthepublicforce

throughtheinstrumentalityofthecourts.

Themeansofthestudyareabodyofreports,oftreatises,andof

statutes,inthiscountryandinEngland,extendingbackforsixhundred

years,andnowincreasingannuallybyhundreds.Inthesesibylline

leavesaregatheredthescatteredpropheciesofthepastuponthecases

inwhichtheaxewillfall.Thesearewhatproperlyhavebeencalled

theoraclesofthelaw.Farthemostimportantandprettynearlythe

wholemeaningofeveryneweffortoflegalthoughtistomakethese

propheciesmoreprecise,andtogeneralizethemintoathoroughly

connectedsystem.Theprocessisone,fromalawyer'

sstatementofa

case,eliminatingasitdoesallthedramaticelementswithwhichhis

client'

sstoryhasclothedit,andretainingonlythefactsoflegal

import,uptothefinalanalysesandabstractuniversalsoftheoretic

jurisprudence.Thereasonwhyalawyerdoesnotmentionthathisclient

woreawhitehatwhenhemadeacontract,whileMrs.Quicklywouldbe

suretodwelluponitalongwiththeparcelgiltgobletandthesea-coal

fire,isthatheforeseesthatthepublicforcewillactinthesameway

whateverhisclienthaduponhishead.Itistomaketheprophecies

easiertoberememberedandtobeunderstoodthattheteachingsofthe

decisionsofthepastareputintogeneralpropositionsandgathered

intotextbooks,orthatstatutesarepassedinageneralform.The

primaryrightsanddutieswithwhichjurisprudencebusiesitselfagain

arenothingbutprophecies.Oneofthemanyevileffectsofthe

confusionbetweenlegalandmoralideas,aboutwhichIshallhave

somethingtosayinamoment,isthattheoryisapttogetthecart

beforethehorse,andconsidertherightorthedutyassomething

existingapartfromandindependentoftheconsequencesofitsbreach,

towhichcertainsanctionsareaddedafterward.But,asIshalltryto

show,alegaldutysocalledisnothingbutapredictionthatifaman

doesoromitscertainthingshewillbemadetosufferinthisorthat

waybyjudgmentofthecourt;

andsoofalegalright.

Thenumberofourpredictionswhengeneralizedandreducedtoasystem

isnotunmanageablylarge.Theypresentthemselvesasafinitebodyof

dogmawhichmaybemasteredwithinareasonabletime.Itisagreat

mistaketobefrightenedbytheever-increasingnumberofreports.The

reportsofagivenjurisdictioninthecourseofagenerationtakeup

prettymuchthewholebodyofthelaw,andrestateitfromthepresent

pointofview.Wecouldreconstructthecorpusfromthemifallthat

wentbeforewereburned.Theuseoftheearlierreportsismainly

historical,auseaboutwhichIshallhavesomethingtosaybeforeI

havefinished.

Iwish,ifIcan,tolaydownsomefirstprinciplesforthestudyof

thisbodyofdogmaorsystematizedpredictionwhichwecallthelaw,for

menwhowanttouseitastheinstrumentoftheirbusinesstoenable

themtoprophesyintheirturn,and,asbearinguponthestudy,Iwish

topointoutanidealwhichasyetourlawhasnotattained.

Thefirstthingforabusinesslikeunderstandingofthematteristo

understanditslimits,andthereforeIthinkitdesirableatonceto

pointoutanddispelaconfusionbetweenmoralityandlaw,which

sometimesrisestotheheightofconscioustheory,andmoreoftenand

indeedconstantlyismakingtroubleindetailwithoutreachingthepoint

ofconsciousness.Youcanseeveryplainlythatabadmanhasasmuch

reasonasagoodoneforwishingtoavoidanencounterwiththepublic

force,andthereforeyoucanseethepracticalimportanceofthe

distinctionbetweenmoralityandlaw.Amanwhocaresnothingforan

ethicalrulewhichisbelievedandpractisedbyhisneighborsislikely

neverthelesstocareagooddealtoavoidbeingmadetopaymoney,and

willwanttokeepoutofjailifhecan.

ItakeitforgrantedthatnohearerofminewillmisinterpretwhatI

havetosayasthelanguageofcynicism.Thelawisthewitnessand

externaldepositofourmorallife.Itshistoryisthehistoryofthe

moraldevelopmentoftherace.Thepracticeofit,inspiteofpopular

jests,tendstomakegoodcitizensandgoodmen.WhenIemphasizethe

differencebetweenlawandmoralsIdosowithreferencetoasingle

end,thatoflearningandunderstandingthelaw.Forthatpurposeyou

mustdefinitelymasteritsspecificmarks,anditisforthatthatIask

youforthemomenttoimagineyourselvesindifferenttootherand

greaterthings.

Idonotsaythatthereisnotawiderpointofviewfromwhichthe

distinctionbetweenlawandmoralsbecomesofsecondaryorno

importance,asallmathematicaldistinctionsvanishinpresenceofthe

infinite.ButIdosaythatthatdistinctionisofthefirstimportance

fortheobjectwhichweareheretoconsider--arightstudyandmastery

ofthelawasabusinesswithwellunderstoodlimits,abodyofdogma

enclosedwithindefinitelines.Ihavejustshownthepracticalreason

forsayingso.Ifyouwanttoknowthelawandnothingelse,youmust

lookatitasabadman,whocaresonlyforthematerialconsequences

whichsuchknowledgeenableshimtopredict,notasagoodone,who

findshisreasonsforconduct,whetherinsidethelaworoutsideofit,

inthevaguersanctionsofconscience.Thetheoreticalimportanceof

thedistinctionisnoless,ifyouwouldreasononyoursubjectaright.

Thelawisfullofphraseologydrawnfrommorals,andbythemereforce

oflanguagecontinuallyinvitesustopassfromonedomaintotheother

withoutperceivingit,aswearesuretodounlesswehavetheboundary

constantlybeforeourminds.Thelawtalksaboutrights,andduties,

andmalice,andintent,andnegligence,andsoforth,andnothingis

easier,or,Imaysay,morecommoninlegalreasoning,thantotake

thesewordsintheirmoralsense,atsomestateoftheargument,andso

todropintofallacy.Forinstance,whenwespeakoftherightsofman

inamoralsense,wemeantomarkthelimitsofinterferencewith

individualfreedomwhichwethinkareprescribedbyconscience,orby

ourideal,howeverreached.Yetitiscertainthatmanylawshavebeen

enforcedinthepast,anditislikelythatsomeareenforcednow,which

arecondemnedbythemostenlightenedopinionofthetime,orwhichat

alleventspassthelimitofinterference,asmanyconscienceswould

drawit.Manifestly,therefore,nothingbutconfusionofthoughtcan

resultfromassumingthattherightsofmaninamoralsenseareequally

rightsinthesenseoftheConstitutionandthelaw.Nodoubtsimple

andextremecasescanbeputofimaginablelawswhichthestatute-making

powerwouldnotdaretoenact,evenintheabsenceofwritten

constitutionalprohibitions,becausethecommunitywouldrisein

rebellionandfight;

andthisgivessomeplausibilitytotheproposition

thatthelaw,ifnotapartofmorality,islimitedbyit.Butthis

limitofpowerisnotcoextensivewithanysystemofmorals.Forthe

mostpartitfallsfarwithinthelinesofanysuchsystem,andinsome

casesmayextendbeyondthem,forreasonsdrawnfromthehabitsofa

particularpeopleataparticulartime.IonceheardthelateProfessor

AgassizsaythataGermanpopulationwouldriseifyouaddedtwocents

tothepriceofaglassofbeer.Astatuteinsuchacasewouldbe

emptywords,notbecauseitwaswrong,butbecauseitcouldnotbe

enforced.Noonewilldenythatwrongstatutescanbeandareenforced,

andwewouldnotallagreeastowhichwerethewrongones.

TheconfusionwithwhichIamdealingbesetsconfessedlylegal

conceptions.Takethefundamentalquestion,Whatconstitutesthelaw?

Youwillfindsometextwriterstellingyouthatitissomething

differentfromwhatisdecidedbythecourtsofMassachusettsor

England,thatitisasystemofreason,thatitisadeductionfrom

principlesofethicsoradmittedaxiomsorwhatnot,whichmayormay

notcoincidewiththedecisions.Butifwetaketheviewofourfriend

thebadmanweshallfindthathedoesnotcaretwostrawsforthe

axiomsordeductions,butthathedoeswanttoknowwhatthe

MassachusettsorEnglishcourtsarelikelytodoinfact.Iammuchof

thismind.Thepropheciesofwhatthecourtswilldoinfact,and

nothingmorepretentious,arewhatImeanbythelaw.

Takeagainanotionwhichaspopularlyunderstoodisthewidest

conceptionwhichthelawcontains--thenotionoflegalduty,towhich

alreadyIhavereferred.Wefillthewordwithallthecontentwhichwe

drawfrommorals.Butwhatdoesitmeantoabadman?

Mainly,andin

thefirstplace,aprophecythatifhedoescertainthingshewillbe

subjectedtodisagreeableconseque