1

Philip Halpern. Stanford Law Review, Dec., 1955, Vol. 8, No. 1 (Dec 1955), pp. 3-8. JSTOR.

p 3.

Robert Jackson was born February I3, 1892, on a small farm near Spring Creek in Warren County, Pennsylvania. At an early age he moved with his family across the state line to Frews- burg, New York, a small village in Chautauqua County near the city of Jamestown. He attended high school in Frewsburg and in Jamestown and there showed a marked flair for public speaking and debating and the qualities of quickness of mind and wit which later brought him fame. After graduation from the Jamestown High School in I91O, he began the study of law in the office of Frank H. Mott, a well-known local lawyer. Young Jackson at- tended the Albany Law School for one year (a two-year course was then prescribed for a law degree), then returned to Jamestown and resumed his studies in Mr. Mott's office. He passed the New York State bar examination and was admitted to the Bar in 19I3 at the age of twenty-one.

  1. Why didn't Jackson finish his second and last year at Albany Law School? I'm assuming that his academic year was (less than) from Sept to June, or just 10 months?

  2. Why not graduate with his LLB, then study at Frank Mott's office? Doesn't earning the LLB afford you more credit and prestige even back in the early 1900's when law degrees were optional?

7
  • It seems deeply unlikely that anyone is going to be able to answer this off the top of their head. If you want the answer, have you researched other, more extensive biographies of Jackson? There are of course innumerable possible reasons for this, such as "it was too expensive" or "he wasn't happy with the quality of education" or "all his friends lived in Jamestown", and in the end the reason may not have ever been anyone's business but Jackson's own. – Nate Eldredge Sep 29 '20 at 19:43
  • 3
    I’m voting to close this question because it's unanswerable. – BlueDogRanch Sep 29 '20 at 20:10
  • 1
    Not only is this unanswerable as it stands, bit even if it was answerable, it's thoroughly off-topic as having nothing to do with the law or legal process. Just because it involved a lawyer or a judge, doesn't make it part of those. – Nij Sep 29 '20 at 22:54
  • 2
    I’m voting to close this question because Nij is exactly right: not only is this unanswerable as it stands, but even if it was answerable, it's thoroughly off-topic as having nothing to do with the law or legal process. Just because it involved a lawyer or a judge, doesn't make it part of those. – DavidSupportsMonica Sep 30 '20 at 3:16
  • 4
    Partial answer. See Wikipedia's Robert H. Jackson: "At the time, students at Albany Law School had three options: taking individual courses without receiving a degree; completing a two-year program and receiving an LL.B. degree; or demonstrating the knowledge required of a first-year student and then taking the second year of the two-year program, which produced a certificate of completion. Jackson chose the third option; he...received his certificate in 1912." – Lars Bosteen Sep 30 '20 at 6:12
5

The simple answer is that a young lawyer (barrister, in particular) learns much more by shadowing a senior lawyer in a legal chamber (legal firm). This hands-on or applied aspect of legal work is considered a privilege, certainly much more valuable than another year or two reading in law libraries (given that they will be doing it for the rest of their professional lives).

The technical term is “pupillage”. In fact, in some parts of the world, being a pupil at a good chamber is still highly valued.

For more: https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/training-qualification/becoming-a-barrister.html

1
  • I don’t have any legal history texts on this, unfortunately. – J Asia Sep 30 '20 at 19:32

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.