democracy in america-1-第80节
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
wer classes。
Lawyers are attached to public order beyond every other consideration； and the best security of public order is authority。 It must not be forgotten that； if they prize the free institutions of their country much； they nevertheless value the legality of those institutions far more： they are less afraid of tyranny than of arbitrary power； and provided that the legislature take upon itself to deprive men of their independence； they are not dissatisfied。
I am therefore convinced that the prince who； in presence of an encroaching democracy； should endeavor to impair the judicial authority in his dominions； and to diminish the political influence of lawyers； would commit a great mistake。 He would let slip the substance of authority to grasp at the shadow。 He would act more wisely in introducing men connected with the law into the government； and if he entrusted them with the conduct of a despotic power； bearing some marks of violence； that power would most likely assume the external features of justice and of legality in their hands。
The government of democracy is favorable to the political power of lawyers； for when the wealthy； the noble； and the prince are excluded from the government； they are sure to occupy the highest stations； in their own right； as it were； since they are the only men of information and sagacity； beyond the sphere of the people； who can be the object of the popular choice。 If； then； they are led by their tastes to combine with the aristocracy and to support the Crown； they are naturally brought into contact with the people by their interests。 They like the government of democracy； without participating in its propensities and without imitating its weaknesses； whence they derive a twofold authority； from it and over it。 The people in democratic states does not mistrust the members of the legal profession； because it is well known that they are interested in
serving the popular cause； and it listens to them without irritation； because it does not attribute to them any sinister designs。 The object of lawyers is not； indeed； to overthrow the institutions of democracy； but they constantly endeavor to give it an impulse which diverts it from its real tendency； by means which are foreign to its nature。 Lawyers belong to the people by birth and interest； to the aristocracy by habit and by taste； and they may be looked upon as the natural bond and connecting link of the two great classes of society。
The profession of the law is the only aristocratic element which can be amalgamated without violence with the natural elements of democracy； and which can be advantageously and permanently combined with them。 I am not unacquainted with the defects which are inherent in the character of that body of men； but without this admixture of lawyer…like sobriety with the democratic principle； I question whether democratic institutions could long be maintained； and I cannot believe that a republic could subsist at the present time if the influence of lawyers in public business did not increase in proportion to the power of the people。
This aristocratic character； which I hold to be common to the legal profession； is much more distinctly marked in the United States and in England than in any other country。 This proceeds not only from the legal studies of the English and American lawyers； but from the nature of the legislation； and the position which those persons occupy in the two countries。 The English and the Americans have retained the law of precedents； that is to say； they continue to found their legal opinions and the decisions of their courts upon the opinions and the decisions of their forefathers。 In the mind of an English or American lawyer a taste and a reverence for what is old is almost always united to a love of regular and lawful proceedings。
This predisposition has another effect upon the character of the legal profession and upon the general course of society。 The English and American lawyers investigate what has been done； the French advocate inquires what should have been done； the former produce precedents； the latter reasons。 A French observer is surprised to hear how often an English dr an American lawyer quotes the opinions of others； and how little he alludes to his own； whilst the reverse occurs in France。 There the most trifling litigation is never conducted without the introduction of an entire system of ideas peculiar to the counsel employed； and the fundamental principles of law are discussed in order to obtain a perch of land by the decision of the court。 This abnegation of his own opinion； and this implicit deference to the opinion of his forefathers； which are common to the English and American lawyer； this subjection of thought which he is obliged to profess； necessarily give him more timid habits and more sluggish inclinations in England and America than in France。
The French codes are often difficult of comprehension； but they can be read by every one； nothing； on the other hand； can be more impenetrable to the uninitiated than a legislation founded upon precedents。 The indispensable want of legal assistance which is felt in England and in the United States； and the high opinion which is generally entertained of the ability of the legal profession； tend to separate it more and more from the people； and to place it in a distinct class。 The French lawyer is simply a man extensively acquainted with the statutes of his country； but the English or American lawyer resembles the hierophants of Egypt； for； like them； he is the sole interpreter of an occult science。
The station which lawyers occupy in England and America exercises no less an influence upon their habits and their opinions。 The English aristocracy； which has taken care to attract to its sphere whatever is at all analogous to itself； has conferred a high degree of importance and of authority upon the members of the legal profession。 In English society lawyers do not occupy the first rank； but they are contented with the station assigned to them； they constitute； as it were； the younger branch of the English aristocracy； and they are attached to their elder brothers； although they do not enjoy all their privileges。 The English lawyers consequently mingle the taste and the ideas of the aristocratic circles in which they move with the aristocratic interests of their profession。
And indeed the lawyer…like character which I am endeavoring to depict is most distinctly to be met with in England： there laws are esteemed not so much because they are good as because they are old； and if it be necessary to modify them in any respect； or to adapt them the changes which time operates in society； recourse is had to the most inconceivable contrivances in order to uphold the traditionary fabric； and to maintain that nothing has been done which does not square with the intentions and complete the labors of former generations。 The very individuals who conduct these changes disclaim all intention of innovation； and they had rather resort to absurd expedients than plead guilty to so great a crime。 This spirit appertains more especially to the English lawyers； they seem indifferent to the real meaning of what they treat； and they direct all their attention to the letter； seeming inclined to infringe the rules of common sense and of humanity rather than to swerve one title from the law。 The English legislation may be compared to the stock of an old tree； upon which lawyers have engrafted the most various shoots； with the hope that； although their fruits may differ； their foliage at least will be confounded with the venerable trunk which supports them all。
In America there are no nobles or men of letters； and the people is apt to mistrust the wealthy； lawyers consequently form the highest political class； and the most cultivated circle of society。 They have therefore nothing to gain by innovation； which adds a conservative interest to their natural taste for public order。 If I were asked where I place the American aristocracy； I should reply without hesitation that it is not composed of the rich； who are united together by no common tie； but that it occupies the judicial bench and the bar。
The more we reflect upon all that occurs in the United States the more shall we be persuaded that the lawyers as a body form the most powerful； if not the only； counterpoise to the democratic element。 In that country we perceive how eminently the legal profession is qualified by its powers； and even by its defects； to neutralize the vices which are inherent in popular government。 When the American people is intoxicated by passion； or carried away by the impetuosity of its ideas； it is checked and stopped by the almost invisible influence of its legal counsellors； who secretly oppose their aristocratic propensities to its democratic instincts； their superstitious attachment to what is antique to its love of novelty； their narrow views to its immense designs； and their habitual procrastination to its ardent impatience。
The courts of justice are the most visible organs by which the legal profession is enabled to control the democracy。 The judge is a lawyer； who； independently of the taste for regularity and order wh
