1. What was the effect in the colonies of "labor-scarcity and land plenty?"
2. Chapter 32 describes the evolution of the profession of lawyers. Please summarize Boorstin's description in a paragraph.
3. Why were so many signers of the Declaration of Independence trained in law?
28 comments:
1. In America, there were so few people of specialty and artisanry, that specialization became overridden by necessity. A man could not limit himself to the single trade of blacksmiting if for his family he also needed to produce a house and its furnishings. For men of trades were so scarce that often there would be nobody to buy furniture from, or pay to do carpentry, or any other plausible trade. Thus families were forced to become at the very least, semi-proficeint in all these trades so they could produce for themselves at least mediocre-quality products with which to subsist. Also, this lack of specialization meant a man could earn a living doing just about anything. If his local community needed a cobbler, he could reach easy prosperity by going into the trade of being a cobbler for his local community. And this idea applied to any trade.
2. America's rendition of the English legal system, much like its rendition of everything else it received from English, was completely different because of the influence of American culture and geography. Firstly, the aristocratic group of the English barristers was non-existent in America. Although the terms, barrister and attorney were still used in America, there was hardly a distinction; they were just lawyers. In fact, in very early America there was such a strong prejudice against lawyers that in some colonies, acts were passed to prohibit lawyers. This is such as the Body of Liberties, Article Number 26, which "prohibited any man from giving a reward to another to represent him in court." However, this "anti-professional" didn't last forever in America as legal matters crept up on the American people, which was bound to happen in any society. However, keeping with the American spirit, even as lawyers began to appear in America, the practice of law remained informal. The judges, who were selected from the best of the barristers in England, often had no legal education in America. This actually left lawyers fully educated in law at a disadvantage, as much of the legal techniques they'd learned were superfluous for a court whose presiding judge would hardly understand half of it. In addition to judges uneducated in law, the jury was also often uneducated in law. Without the need to be educated in law to present a proper case, American legal practice was simply an oratory skill.
3. The large plurality of lawyers in the groups that founded the United States was not based on a special reverence towards lawyers. That was an English thing. In fact, the large amount of lawyers was because of a complete opposite reason. The effect of America in almost all aspects was to tear down the artificial walls produced by English society, and blur the lines between different distinctions. This applied to law and all other professions. So all these men at the signing of the Declaration of Independence who were lawyers weren't there simply by the fact they were lawyers, but because knowledge of law supplemented all the other trades and professions of the American society that had blossomed in the Colonies.
1: The colonies had great reasources hence the land plenty but also there was a problem in finding people to cultivate the land and build a future there. America was so in need of more people, people for the solleges, and people for the land. Because there was no people for labor and work there was much unused land that was just sitting there waiting to be used for something profitable, and because of this that area would be unprofitable which was hard on the economy and commerce in that area. The colonies were in no position to not need anymore people or goods, the colonies were in fact the opposite and in dire need of more ways to increase their growth and their economic contribution. In the earlier chapters Boorstin gives examples of people whom in Europe would have one profession and be great at that single work, but in America there was no reasources for that and they had to take on multiple crafts, Boorstin gives the exampe of a clothes maker who has to produce his own thread, tools, cloth and also he would have ot be able to make other items that go along with that craft.
2: In England there was a heararchy in the legal system which held the barristers at the top. These men acted in high courts and held much power over these courts, but in America there was again not enough people to create a rigid system like this. In America in the small colonies there was the likelyhood that judges and practitioners would already know one another and this put a bias onto the court, but to solve this problem when a lawyer was able to practice they were able to practice in all courts. In large colonies there were different courts but mostly each court was for a specific purpose and thus they did not step on eachothers toes. Mostly the jurry was not educated in law just like now in the 20th century but also in colonial America some of the laywers were not fully educated and were not prepared to act in the courts and for this reason some areas had a hatred for the court system and passed laws against having courts because to them the courts were interfearing with justice when the reason for having courts was to act of justice.
3: Many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were trained in law so that there was no loopholes and no ways around showing the English that they were no longer part of England's holdings. They were able to create something that was completely against the control that England had over the colonies and they were able to state that they were free and could create a society totally different that would thrive with out the mothering of England.
1. "Labor-scarcity and land-plenty" molded the lives of the colonies inevitably. There simply weren't enough people to fill the job demands that were commonplace in England. Because of the lack of workers, the quality of the work was usually lowered, and one man had to be specialized in many different jobs to keep a living. there wasn't the money to pay for specialized work, and workers weren't taught in official ways. Because the colonies were land-plenty, they were tempted to "use up" their land, but this would be devestating to the farmerts andworkers of the land. Land was less valuable in America, and therefore it did not become like the "legal and social" place of England. Aslo, with the lowering of specialization for jobs and the abundance of land, virtually anyone could earn a living in America.
2. Law in Amertica was vastly different than in England. In Europe, lawyers were mostly upper-class and specialized in in different parts of law. This is a definate contrast to America, where a lawyer had to learn of many kinds of laws and hold a large law job that would be several different jobs in England. In contast to England, law was not an upper-class job in Amrica. In fact, anyone could learn it because of the basic outlines that law books of the day gave. It was a broader look at law that helped to incorporate law into American society. Although there was no planned, "official" law in the colonies, the heads of the colonies provided suitable law for the individual areas. Appreniceship was common later on, with lawyers finally being seperated from the whole of the people. With distiction of lawyers, the colonies were able to become less dependent on England, and form their own system of law. It was in this time that many lawyers were fouind to be laymen. Law books were never as important in the New World, with the only law books being basic outlines so that any man could learn. Throughout the formation of law in America, there was always a suspicion of lawyers, but the ability for any man to learn law heled it become commonplace in America.
3. While it was stated that many signers of the Declaration were trained in law, this was for the most part not true. Being a "lawyer" in America was far different than in England. There was little seperation between common knowledge and law in America, so it is not true that these men were trained exclusively in law. But the ability to boast that law was common knowledge in America gave it an advantage over England, and showed that even the most normal man could rise in the colonies.
1. "Labor-scarcity and land plenty" was the fact that land in the colonies was abundant and there weren't enough people to cultuvate all of it. ALl who lived in the colonies had to focus most of their energy on farming to live. A few individuals who found a sparce amount of spare time would spend it learning trades to decrease their spending. If a man could produce his own barrels, he wouldn't have to rely on a cooper. A person who was successful at multiple trades wouldn't have to pay others to make essential items for him. This idea caught on and the need for artisans dropped until enough food was being produced that a man could learn a profession and survive off of the profits earned without having to harvest his own food.
2. According to Boorstin, lawyers in the colonies could never match up against lawyera in England. England had a hierarchy in the legal systerm, which the colonies didn't. The English hierarchy was topped by the barristers, who had a heavy influence in the courtroom. It was also much easier to become a lawyer in the colonies; one merely had to read up on the laws that were involved in the issue and be able to present a viable case. In addition to not having to know the laws in the colonies, the colonies had very few laws that were universal and accepted in all the colonies; those that were accepted everywhere were very basic and stood as "guildlines" for other laws to be built upon in the future. Although, many times in American court, laws wouldn't even be mentioned, the only things presented would be evidence and manipulation of the jury. In England, there were a large variety of different courts which delt with different issues: small claims, cases involving delinquents, murder, etc. Very few "specialized" courts existed in the colonies, and those that did were located in areas with larger populations.
3. Most of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were trained in law because they wished to make a tight and self-evident document which would undoubtedly declare their independece from England with no chance of the English finding a clause that would indicate their subservience towards England still lingers.
1. Labor-scarcity and land plenty were becoming common place in colonial America. Labor scarcity meant that men were performing a variety of jobs since skilled workers couldn't be found. And land plenty was the trend that land was losing its value; once the land could no longer support the farmer, he would move right on to the next plot of open land. The effect of labor scarcity was that professions began to merge; the carpenter was also the copper, cabinetmaker, and cobbler. Land plenty effected the attitudes of American men. Since there was not a shortage of land, the worth of the land went unappreciated. However, land plenty did have its advantage because since it was so easy to pick up and move from place to place, one could simply change professions and start life with a second or third chance.
2. In Europe, the legal field was divided into a variety of different specialties that were never combined. However, in America, going back to the fact of labor-scarcity, the legal specialties were mixed into one big bowl. All lines between the separate professions were blurred and there was less need for the legal business before the mid-18th century than in England. As the colonies began to prosper and evolve, though, they couldn't live without some form of law. It had not been previously planned, but eventually each colony set up their own forms of loose legal professions. Law became a general study and although America didn't produce a great legal system or encyclopedia, it produced a diversified and miscellaneous effort from the common men to achieve a solid legal learning.
1.
The effect in the colonies of “labor-scarcity and land plenty” was because labor and skills were short, a lower standard was set. Due to few people that specialized in certain areas, people took on multiple tasks out of necessity. For example, “a carpenter had to be a cooper, cabinetmaker, and cobbler.” (pg 193). Land-plenty showed that “America needed to be less efficient” in order to survive and make a living. A person could not limit themselves to one specific trade in order to make a sufficient living. Land was taken in large tracts, to be saved for the future and once the land was useless and unable to support a living, they moved on from it. There was plenty of land, not enough labor. Men had to make a living for themselves and their families, and they did this by taking up multiple trades. Families had to become knowledgeable in these trades because of the labor scarcity. There would be no way to purchase what they needed such as paying someone to do carpentry. Therefore, a carpenter was both a cooper, cabinetmaker, and a cobbler.
2.
Lawyers had to study all forms of law. Common law, civil law, natural law, and admiralty law. Their legal system reflected that of the English legal with a few variations. In America, the top level aristocratic “barristers” did not exist. There was not much of a distinction between barristers and attorneys in America, but the terms were carried over and continued. For a time, the legal business was scarce and could not support many different specialties at a time. A legal profession did not even develop until mid 18th century. The prejudice against lawyers from England had also carried over to America. Because of distrust in the court and legal systems, lawyers did not acquire the “upper class monopolistic” positions they had in England. In Virginia, the aristocracy even did some of their own legal work. The Body of Liberties, Art. No. 26, “prohibited any man from giving a reward to another to represent him in court.” (pg 197). However, this attitude against professional lawyers did not last. By the end of the colonial era, each colony had a legal profession. Also, an Act of Parliament in 1729 was passed, which required 5 years of being an apprentice under “articles” before practicing in court. America still was somewhat distrustful which resulted in law practice being somewhat informal. Often the Judge was fairly uneducated in law practice, as was the jury, which left professional lawyers a difficult position, because the neither judges (who were laymen, according to Boorstin) nor jury would know all of what the professional had learned. Some places, however, allowed higher educated lawyers to practice in higher courts.
3.
So many signers of the Declaration of Independence were trained in law or had an understanding of it because they needed the Declaration, a legal document, to be fair and written so that there were no “loopholes” that would make the declaration null. Legal knowledge, also, had become more simplified and popular. Many people had atleast some knowledge of the law. "31 of the signers of the Declaration were 'Lawyers.'" (pg 205). The Declaration was a separation from England, and needed to convey this professionally and from a correct legal standpoint. Signers of the Declaration were “trained in law” because they needed to be self-evident and prove to England that it had no hold over the colonies.
1. In America there was a scarcity of specialized labor. So, men had to do things themselves since they could hire people to do it for them. A lower standard was set due to the fact that no one was trained in the skills needed. Land plenty meant that farmers could be less efficient because they had more land then there European counterparts.
2. At the top stood Barristers who practiced in courts, they themselves were the true professionals. The Barristers would be the ones that could become judges. Next stood the Attorneys who were not able to be in court, but could help their client. Lastly stood the Solicitors, also known as the servants, in the court.
3. There wasn’t a clear line of what was and wasn’t a lawyer at that time. Jefferson for instance had a brief apprenticeship with a lawyer, and then from then on called himself a lawyer. So, even though twenty-five of the signers of the Declaration of Independence claimed to be lawyer, only a few were probably really lawyers.
1. Labor scarcity and the abundance of land in newly settled America resulted in both positive and negative effects. The small population and workforce of the American colonies coupled with the vast tracks of land allowed opportunities of social mobility and wealth to any hard working man. Land was inexpensive and people were desperate for apprentices, making securing land or a job an easier task. However, there were also fallbacks to the labor-scarcity and land-plenty in America. Due to the fact that labor was so scarce, standards for work and thus the quality of products produced had to be greatly lowered. This made specialization, which was a commonality in Europe, inadequate for survival in America as “The carpenter had to be cooper, cabinetmaker, and cobbler.” The previous mentality of finding your “calling” was instead replaced by seizure of opportunity in America. Additionally, the profusion of land resulted in less appreciation for the fertile grounds as men took the land for granted by growing crops unsustainably and simply moving on once it became infertile.
2. The legal profession in England was an intricate and complex line of work, which was not only clearly stratified above the rest of society, but strictly stratified within the industry as well. In no way could the American lawyer have been more different. The very minute and copious distinctions within the English legal profession, such as the highly noted difference between counselors (the highest status) and solicitors (attorneys), failed in making it across the Atlantic. Virginia even proclaimed in 1810 that the separation of barristers and attorneys were no longer to be. Several factors, including distance from England, led to the distinct character of the American lawyer. While Barristers in England were able to create monopolies over their profession, it was impossible in America as the amount of legal businesses were so few. In fact, no legal profession developed in the colonies until the mid-1700s. However, as the wealth and the population of wealthy peoples increased, and business transactions became more elaborate, a legal profession arose. The court system of England was very structured, but the organization of courts in the colonies was lax, with even judges lacking proper legal education. Each colony established a legal profession which suited them and there were few unities among them. Whereas English lawyers were somewhat revered in England, the distrust and animosity towards lawyers in America could not have been greater (an innate dislike and distrust which many Americans still hold today). Lawyers in the colonies would not gain the high social status that English lawyers enjoyed. In Massachusetts, an act even forbade a man to pay another to represent him in court. Additionally, the long and specific legal education of lawyers in England was not mimicked in the colonies. Instead, legal apprenticeships were formed, and this was the path taken in order to enter the legal profession. Although colonial lawyers did have somewhat of a higher level of learning, it was usually unspecific to the legal profession. While this American legal profession broke down the “walls of legal knowledge”, it also evoked an “anti-professional spirit.” Primarily, laymen were judges, and it was thought that actual legal training could hurt your chances at court to the enmity against lawyers. Instead, laymen, “semi-lawyers, pseudo-lawyers, and few men of solid legal learning” became the basis of the American Legal profession. Finally, efforts from authors such as Blackstone made niceties of the legal profession understandable to the common man, preparing “self-made men for leadership in the New World.”
3. The early and prominent destruction of the barrier of legal knowledge in America led to the widespread understanding of legal ways throughout most learned men. Any educated man in America had some sort of basic legal knowledge due to “the vagueness of the boundary between legal and all other knowledge in a fluid America.” As a result, “lawyers” assembled to be a majority in the signers of the Declaration of Independence, members of the Constitutional Convention and the first Congress.
3. To look at why so many lawyers signed the Declaration of Independence, we must first look at what defined a lawyer in colonial America. In America, men studied to become lawyers, but most of this studying was informal. At this time there were no Bar exams. A man who had merely read a few good law books could become a lawyer. A man who had studied law was said to be less qualified than a man who had read law books, according to Boorstin. The fact that out of 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence 25 were lawyers was not surprising for the time. Even Thomas Jefferson was a self-taught lawyer with a brief apprenticeship in a law office. During colonial times in America, there were no set standards for becoming a lawyer. Judges were not even officially educated in law. Most Judges were laymen who had other jobs as well as being Judges. In colonial America, part-time, self-trained lawyers were very common. That is why so many signers of the Declaration of Independence were lawyers.
1. “Labor-scarcity” in the colonies alluded to the fact that few or no experts were available for certain trades, all of the experts were located elsewhere, and instead a man knew many trades on a basic level. As a result, the standard for labor was lower compared with that of Europe. America had “land-plenty”; farmers did not value their land very highly because they knew that to secure a fresh tract of land was very simple, and so land was not well regulated or farmed efficiently. These circumstances resulted in an abundance of land-owners as well as a demand for men who were already experts or apprentices who were willing to become masters of a trade in order to more easily help the agricultural families of the colonies.
2. In the early days of the colonies, there was no lawyer profession. The leaders of the colonies did not want to give power to a new class of lawyers, not to mention the bias they had against lawyers and their monopolies, so instead they themselves took care of the law work. The growing colonies did eventually need functioning legal systems; however, the structure and rules of these systems differed from colony to colony. Even then, many of the lawyers had no formal training (it was hard to get this within the colonies) beyond an apprenticeship or were simply laymen who stuck to common sense instead of to law books. While the lawyers lacked expertise, the average American was somewhat well-read on the subject of law and could be considered an “amateur lawyer.”
3. So many signers of the Declaration of Independence were trained in law because much of the higher-level education during this time consisted of law combined with other studies; a well-educated man often had a working knowledge of the law. Another factor in this was that to be considered a lawyer did not take years of specialized study, an interest in the law coupled with an apprenticeship was sufficient.
1. America had lots of land but not a large number of people to tend to that land, "labor-scarcity and land plenty." People had to adapt and learn different trades in order to stay alive. "The lay man had to be prepared to act the lawyer, the architect, and the physician, and to practice crafts which others knew much better." (pg 193) Families had to learn many trades, and when they did they saved money since they could make their own items and not need to pay for someone else to do it.
2. There was a heirarchy in England's law system, with "barristers" on the top. The American legal system was less sophisticated, with no developed legal profession and often even judges had no legal training. Educated people, like physicians, became part of the legal system but very few of them had any training. Law was needed in America, and eventually some men began to study the law, with each colony having its own needs and ways. Attorney's in America also got more responsibilies, with a fewer amount of people they had to fill in for other jobs that exsisted in England's legal system. Americans wanted to be trained had a harder time because there were almost no books circuating around the colonies.
3. Many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were trained in law so they could avoid drawing up a document with loopholes. They wanted to show the Engilsh government that they wanted to be independent, and since they were making a legal document it was helpful to be trained in law to avoid England getting flase messages.
~Chris Sogge~ :)
1.) Labor shortages and land plenty had profound effects on the lives of colonists. Because every citizen was needed for generic work to keep the colonies afloat, there was no possible way to develop job specialization like in England. People were often forced to take multiple different jobs to mantain a decent living, and the work quality was usually very poor.
3.) Because so many of the signers were trained in law, it made the document impossible for the English to ignore. Just the fact that all of the signers were highly educated (law being considered a very high form of education) made the message even stronger, that the colonies elite citizens were against England. Also, the training in law helped them to right an almost flawless document with no mistakes written for England to capitalize on.
1. The standard of labor and good produced was lowered because people, out of necessity and the scarcity of labor, couldn't specialize in one good or service and thus didn't perform or produce as well as they had potential to. The wealth of land meant that people weren't attached to the land they had. Once a plot was depleted, they could just find a new one since there was plenty of it in the undeveloped America. (Could this have been the beginning of the American trend to get rid of anything that wasn't brand new anymore, without regard for what was going to happen to the old? Nowadays, people will get a new refrigerator simply because it's not "updated" but may still work fine. The American wastefulness has been there since the beginning apparently...)
2. In England the system of lawyers was very hierarchal and developed but in the colonies, an actual legal profession as was seen in England didn't develop until much later. Each colony had its own type of legal profession. Bar associations were made in the colonies, but they tended to be small and and irregular, nothing like the sophisticated system in England. "Lawyers" tended to have unspecialized education. Southern institutions imitated the English system slightly better though. Law education was very diverse and many common people learned some of the basics of law. However, people who would be considered lawyers in England were few and far between.
3. So many of the signers of the declaration were trained in law for a few reasons. Colleges often gave a basic training in law to all of their attendants to create better citizens. It also didn't take much to become a lawyer in the colonies. In addition to that, many people just had a general interest in law and would learn some of the basics of it.
1. Since there were few people in the American colonies who specialized in the arts, that specialization turned to necessity in order to survive. Thus many of those people turned to planting and harvesting land along with their specialization. With the large amount of land came great resources hence the land plenty, but people to work the land was not included hence the labor-scarcity. The productivity was low because of the fact people had to work more than one job to survive. They had to spend less time working on their land. As a result of this, the quality of the goods also went down labor put into the land was hurried and sloppy, thus having a negative result.
3. Since lawyers in America were not considered lower class, anyone could be a lawyer and there were most likely plenty to choose from, but some of them probably were not lawyers. Lawyers were chosen to sign the Declaration to make sure it was written fairly and there were no loopholes for England to take advantage of.
1. Labor scarcity and land plenty refers to the lack of skilled workers and the necessity of those skilled workers. When this occured, a lot of unworked land appeared and America was not making the most of its resources. After a while, many americans had to learn new trades, just to make everything work out for the americna nation. Many people chose random jobs that they felt that they were specialized in, even if that job was not recognized as a real occupation.
1) Because of labor scarcity and land-plenty there became two things. The first was the fact that laborers, both craftsmen and farmers were forced to lower the quality goals set for their tasks. For craftsmen, it meant taking up many trades and thus having a larger workload with less skilled workers to help. For farmers, the standard of land usage changed. In England, new land was very difficult to find, and thus a farmer would to his best to work with the situation. In America, land was so cheap and farming so mobile, that a farmer would simply “use up” his land and move on. American farmers simply didn’t have to be efficient because of the “land-plenty concept.”
3) Many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence and other significant documents were lawyers simply because there was a very vague boundary between lawyer and “law studier” or other general professions. While it was important to know the system of law well when involved in politics, there was no way of accrediting whether someone was really a lawyer or not. For example, Thomas Jefferson called himself a lawyer, when really he just studied for himself and did a brief apprenticeship.
1. People stopped becoming artisans in the trade of their choice, and just had to work with everything so as to make up for lack of labor.
2.Due to a lack of positions such as barrister in the colonies, american lawyers became vital for the law system to function, making it a lucrative profession, especially as the positions weren't just for the aristocracy.
3. Law was one of the best careers an american could have, espescially in places with labor-scarcity. also, lawyers knew how the system woked, and were probably the best certified to the task.
1. One of the four facts about America that caused this new wave of thought (or says Boorstin) was the “labor-scarcity and land-plenty.” The labor and the skills needed to make America a prosperous colony were few in coming which caused men to become “jack-of-all-trades.” Men couldn’t just be a carpenter, but also had to be a cobbler and a cabinetmaker because of the lack of outside hired help which affected the colonies by causing their standards to be lowered. And while expectations were lowered the fact of land-plenty increased the need for famers to be less efficient. Everything was for sell and Americans lost the incentive to toil over their fields because they became accustomed to moving onto a new plot of land as soon as the old plot stopped supporting them. Because there were fewer laws placed on the land and the system of agriculture there was less specialization needed. People (free white colonists) could come over to America and start up work with anything and were free to exchange their fortunes.
2. In colonial America the progression of the professions of lawyers evolved very little and slowly to, at the end of the colonial ear, create a semi organized system of law. In the very beginning America discouraged the creation of a lawyer class and few colonies gave any power to the legal aristocracy. However, as population and commerce started increasing the colonies were forced to create a very vague legal profession. Close to the mid 18th century the informal training, in the form of apprenticeship, of attorneys and solicitors became a five year requirement in order to work in the courts, and the connection to the Inns of Courts in London grew in the South. While the lawyers were few in numbers and their training in the New World was rather unspecialized, several lawyers were being sent over to the Inns of Courts to be trained and to later come back and be introduced into the system of courts. However, since the education of most lawyers was gained through colonial college there wasn’t much that distinguished them, and anyone could become a semi-lawyer/amateur. For this reason laymen made up a large portion of the early law system and advocates lost incentive to become well educated lawyers because they would be considered snobbish in front of the lay judges.
3. One of the main reasons that so many of the signers of the Declarations of Independence were trained in law was the fact that law in America wasn’t its own professional institution and was integrated into the community. The idea of common law that dealt with the concept of looking at all things to seeing how they were accomplished and then looking at how they should be done was introduced into American society and erased the wall between other law and the monopoly or institution system of law. Since most men had this general knowledge of law it’s not surprising that twenty-five signers of the Declaration were “lawyers” or versed in some aspects of common and more general law. As well the respect for law had increased and the use of more legal language had risen along with it. People believed the community had sprouted out of the “legal framework” which had been set down.
Chapter 31- 33
Boorstin’s biasness became obvious in his references to the Native Americans. On page 192 he says, “He must be protective over himself and his family from marauding savages.” He describes the people as extremely primitive and “barbaric”.
1. The effect of “labor-scarcity and land plenty” was that there was lots of work and room for men to be versatile in their work. Any man could rise in society by gaining land and benefiting from the opportunities he had. Men with jobs were less specialized in a specific area and had to learn multiple skills to survive and thrive in the New World.
2. The legal system and use of lawyers in America was very different than in England. In America the level of law was so low that lawyers were extremely distrusted. When the use of lawyers evolved the system was pushed towards better education of the lawyers. Help from England was asked for in the training of the American lawyers. Also, in America they did not have the hierarchy that England had with barristers, attorneys, and solicitors. In addition to a poor distinction of the levels of lawyers America did not have courts that specialized in certain legal matters. This created a legal system that was based on only evidence and a poor and easily manipulated jury.
3. Many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were not specifically used because of their training in law. These men were chosen due to their overall knowledge and competence in political affairs. Being a lawyer in America was not especially distinctive in its specific knowledge. Common knowledge and knowledge in law were not very different.
Taylor Oster 2009
1. The effect of labor scarcity and land plenty required the average American laborer to be extremely versatile what he could accomplish. So many social labor niches required filling, but there were not enough people to fill them, causing one to cover the duties of what would in England be specialized many. Issues arising from this were that quality of work could not be guaranteed, because most of the time the worker was "covering" for a position he was not trained to perform. This is best summarized by Boorstin: "Where the round of daily life has been worn into a groove by many generations living in the same place, men can prepare simply for the tasks which their ancestors have faced before them. But not in a New World. Here...the layman had to be prepared to act the lawyer, the architect, and the physician, and to practice crafts which others...knew much better."
2. Population scarcity also had an effect on the organization and application of the legal system in the New World. Stratified social structure within courts and lawyers (for example, the aristocratic position of English "barristers") could not exist in a place where each area had perhaps one single court, and a lawyer had to "study common law, and civil law, and natural law, and admiralty law, and must do the duty of a counsellor, a lawyer, an attourney, a solicitor, and even of a scrivener". The versatility of early American lawyers in the court disallowed its transformation into the "elaborately organized and stratified" profession in England. The law was also an issue. There was no unified law between all the colonies; local rulers set forth their own for the purpose of day-to-day fluidity of life, not intrinsic court battles, and because of barrister dominance in England, lawyers were also by default disliked and distrusted. "Courts were more loosely and more extemporaneously organized," Boorstin states, "And...even judges commonly lacked legal training, [and] distrust of lawyers became an institution." In comparison to contemporaries in England, early American courts and lawyers could not hold up a candle.
3. The majority of the signers of the Declaration were lawyers not because they were lawyers and lawyers were held in high esteem, but because they were held as to be knowledgeable and politically competent. Also, a person, as a self-declared lawyer, need not be professional as we think of lawyers today, nor even practice law as their main job. As Boorstin says, "The boundaries of all American professional privelege were hazy. What it does show is the pervasiveness of legal competence among American men of affairs and the vagueness of the bounday between legal and all other knowledge in a fluid America." The knowledge of law was not specific to the profession of law, and thus many were "lawyers" just based on their cognizance of common law, which was nearly synonoymous with common knowledge and common sense. The large number of "lawyers" present at the signing only goes to show the unspecified nature of the law profession in America, how common knowledge of law was among all trades, and how flexible the exchanges of trades and their overlaps were.
1. Due to the large land of Colonial America, but the very small amount of actual people, the settlers had to gain a basic proficiency in almost all crafts, so that they might provide for themselves the simple services which would be provided my craft-masters in England. Though more difficult work or more artisan-specific work might still be performed by those artisans, the general populous had need to know the basic skills.
2. In colonial America, the legal profession was quite at odds with that established and esteemed, though often hated, profession in England. Due to the lack of proper legal training for most of those who would’ve wished to have been Barristers or Lawyers, a situation arose where laymen became the lawyers and solicitors of certain types of law or certain groups. Similarly, with the judges, often they would have no “real” training in law, at least not by the English standards of the age, they would often be laymen, but, as Boorstin points out “a very ordinary country man in New-England is almost qualified for a country-attorney in England.” P(201)
3. Lawyers, at the time of the Declarations signing, were one of the few groups which to a small degree had high-level training in specialized fields available to them. From this, many of those who had political mindsets or ambitions chose a course in law, partially to further themselves and partially to show their knowledge. However, it might also be said that due to the fact that there was a low level of separation between whom you might classify as “lawyers” and “laymen” in those days, they were not necessarily what one might’ve deemed “lawyers” in their own time.
1. What was the effect in the colonies of "labor-scarcity and land plenty?"
The effect of this was the initially slow development of the land to an agriculturally centered society and also the larger land grants the English government could give out.
Boorstin seems to be biased against Native Americans, largely because he does not mention them in his writing. He refers only to the transition of European systems of thought, and how they were being transferred to an area that was totally new and transformed old world customs, and disregards the customs and interactions of the Native Americans who already existed in this so-called “new world.”
1. Labor scarcity meant that because there were fewer people, and therefore fewer specialized professions in America than in Europe, colonists often had to accomplish tasks themselves, because they could not find anybody to complete the task for them. Also, people found it beneficial to be a “jack of all trades” instead of specializing in one area, because having multiple skills meant a better chance of making a living. Land plenty referred to the relative abundance of land. This meant that although land was still valuable, it lost many of the social and legal attributions it had held in Europe. Once land had been used, and was of no more use to colonists, the colonists would move on and find new land opportunities, rather than reusing the same land or being efficient with their land.
2. Originally, lawyers in England were divided into 4 different categories: barristers, attorneys, solicitors, and notaries. Barristers were only from the upper class, and the only group considered part of a “true profession.” The other three categories were not as high in status, and only considered tradesmen. This schema did not transfer well to American law, partly because there were not enough people to make such specialization practical, but also because there was little need for such a complex legal system. As American society and economics progressed, there became more need for a legal system, but it did not become so specialized. Instead, the people that did become involved in law were not professionally trained lawyers. Publication of books such as Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England made the bare essentials of law available to everyone, so that law became much more generalized and a thing of the public, instead of the upper-class occupation it had been with the English barristers.
3. Signers of the Declaration of Independence were trained in law because at the time, many people knew at least the rudimentaries of law. This is another example of American colonists being proficient in many fields, because of the lack of people and the need for all colonists to help move American society forward.
1. The effect of this in the colonies is that many men were foreced to learn lots of "hands on" skills because there was no one else around to do them or because they were too poor to hire someone to do it. The land plenty part forced the Americans to be less effecient. For if they were to use all of their land then it would ruin their profit for the next year, so crop rotation had to be used. This meant that much of the land went unused at times in the colonies.
3. So many of the signers of the Decleration of Independence were trainied in law because it would make this oh so important document more official. With having many of the men being lawyers they could put all of their knowledge together to create one solid document.
1. What was the effect in the colonies of "labor-scarcity and land plenty?"
Labor-scarcity again deals with the fact that the colonies were constantly struggling for survival. There was no complacency where people could specialize in a specific skill (i.e. blacksmithing or cobbling), and therefore everyone had to develop at least a moderate ability to provide themselves with the services usually performed by an artisan. In addition to that, there was so much land that it was of very little value. Therefore, there were many land owners
2. Chapter 32 describes the evolution of the profession of lawyers. Please summarize Boorstin's description in a paragraph.
The colonists in America enjoyed being free from the significant power that lawyers had had in England. They obviously weren’t keen to give power to lawyers at first, so for a time all of the colonists dealt with legal issues. Eventually, a more organized legal system was put in place, using more amateur lawyers than those in England.
3. Why were so many signers of the Declaration of Independence trained in law?
Law was one of the main facets of higher education at the time. Any man who attended school extensively would be trained in law. It’s important to note that to become a lawyer at the time required much less training than it does now. For example, no official Bar exam was in place, and many lawyers and judges were actually commoners with a short apprenticeship or some law books.
1. What was the effect in the colonies of "labor-scacity and land plenty"?
What this means is that there is alot of land in America but the population can not take full advantage of it because its to small. Thsi causes no time for people to specialize in certain skills because everyone is working the land.
3. Why were so many signers of the Declaration of Indapendence trained in law?
First off back then being trained in law was probably one of the highest educations at the time. PLus, when there are so many people trained in law it makes a better written document and it makes it stand out to others.
The way these people were trained in law was mostly through becoming an apprentice of a lawyer.
2. Chapter 32 describes the evolution of the profession of lawyers. Please summarize Boorstin's description in a paragraph.
Boorstin describes in this chapter the difference of the development of the lawyer in the Americas from those in England. He says that in England, the barristers held the top positions in the courts. They had a significant amount of power and held a considerable amount of power in the courts. In the Americas however, there was no distinguishment between lawyer and banisters, everyone who held a profession in the courts was just a lawyer and there was nut such a stratified legal system in the Americas as there was in England.
1. What was the effect in the colonies of "labor-scarcity and land plenty?"
The effect of "labor-scarcity and land-plenty" was that everything was done to a lower standard in America. First of all, since there was so little specialized labor, every man had to do everything for himself. Seeing as no one had any training in specialized areas, they could only do a mediocre job, thus setting a lower standard for work. Secondly, the standard of farm work was also lowered, because of the sheer amount of land. Farmers had so much land that, in order to keep up with it all, they had to lower the efficiency with which they farmed.
Mira Schlosberg
Post a Comment