Mycroft
Banned
- Messages
- 6,388
- Points
- 36
Cars owned: Getting a King-Cab Rat with a V8
Lawyers when they are not going about their "business" are probably quite decent folk.
They enter into each days work from their normal life and it is as if as they sit at their desk or possibly as they approach their place of work become the most venal and worthless of souls.
Their profession is to be paid to profess, to profess that their client is either innocent as driven Arctic snow or that the State considers the person in the dock to be as black-hearted and devilish as Old Nick himself.
Jonathan Swift spoke of men brought up from youth to by words alone make black white and white black according to who had paid them for such.
Upon conquest the first call was for a few of hundred years "Let us kill all the Lawyers" forever enshrined in English by the phrase appearing in Shakespeare's Henry 6th.
Such calls for these, the most venal of all the people who place their fingers in the corpse of despair ring down the centuries.
In fact there were calls from Greeks and Romans for them to be ostracised regularly even before there was a book called the Bible that we swear to tell the truth upon.
450 years before our present AD calendar Plato called them 'those that are paid to take up the worst cause' as at that time only the bad seemed to need a lawyer.
In 204BC the Romans were so concerned by the effect of Lawyers upon moral and the ability to speak freely that the Senate passed a Law, an edict, that no lawyer could ply their trade for money, this lead to what was called advocacy, even today and advocate in any other walk of life is a man or woman that motions for something for free.
But eventually fees were being paid under the table as parties or mini-festivals so the edict was ignored in less than 20 years.
The law was a codex in quite the same way as is the law today, with exactitude and uniformity, the law was really about who cold must the most persuasive rhetorical argument and it was the importance of rhetoric that meant that young men in pursuit of wealth became rhetoricians. they even managed to form scientific guilds in Rome, literally the Science of Persuasion.
So again in 100BC the Censors (like prefects only with the power to remove entire groups) closed down the schools because of the public bad these voices caused.
By 155AD these guilds had once again curbed free speech sufficiently to make them hated. The quote this time was that anyone foolish enough to think they could stand up to a paid rhetorician was in the same position of that of a corpse fighting off maggots.
Even when trying to mediate these paid pronouncers (I refuse to elevate them to being professors, thereby according them an undeserved accolade) on the good or the bad to an audience still cannot help themselves and will often through this lack of that audience at the Bar make matters so bad that even the kindest of souls will often fall out of favour further.
I know some Lawyers, the above is true.
But we have an ever growing base for complaints and a growing hurt within men that rather than being curbed or reined back is instead being given fuel and Oxygen to make an already bad situation worse.
I am of course talking about the modern Lawyer's tendency to once more swamp the to and fro of ideas and argument except outside of a courtroom.
There is a dark reality, Lawyers should not design the legal system, we have forgotten this for 40 years now and we are paying the price.
It is as if we have put foxes in charge of the hen-house.
Some reading this might say that surely only Lawyers can make the law and control the system.
This is wrong, deeply wrong, flawed to the point of shattering, the law is there to serve us not control or enslave us.
Often these days it seems that we have crooked lawyers representing crooked cases for crooked clients and in a precedential system like ours that is only going to be ruinous.
So we need a cull... to do as our Noble Greek and Roman forbears once did, reject their words, reject their meddling, the way to do this is simple.
Money, the money paid has to be dramatically cut and cases compulsorily assigned to those Lawyering for a living regardless of status.
The alternative to rejection is as always ejection and by that I mean the right to practice is removed.
Such measures would change the way law was used, meaning that it would be something least wanted... and that I think is what any sane man or woman wants from the law, for it to be the very last resort.
Thank you for reading.
M.
They enter into each days work from their normal life and it is as if as they sit at their desk or possibly as they approach their place of work become the most venal and worthless of souls.
Their profession is to be paid to profess, to profess that their client is either innocent as driven Arctic snow or that the State considers the person in the dock to be as black-hearted and devilish as Old Nick himself.
Jonathan Swift spoke of men brought up from youth to by words alone make black white and white black according to who had paid them for such.
Upon conquest the first call was for a few of hundred years "Let us kill all the Lawyers" forever enshrined in English by the phrase appearing in Shakespeare's Henry 6th.
Such calls for these, the most venal of all the people who place their fingers in the corpse of despair ring down the centuries.
In fact there were calls from Greeks and Romans for them to be ostracised regularly even before there was a book called the Bible that we swear to tell the truth upon.
450 years before our present AD calendar Plato called them 'those that are paid to take up the worst cause' as at that time only the bad seemed to need a lawyer.
In 204BC the Romans were so concerned by the effect of Lawyers upon moral and the ability to speak freely that the Senate passed a Law, an edict, that no lawyer could ply their trade for money, this lead to what was called advocacy, even today and advocate in any other walk of life is a man or woman that motions for something for free.
But eventually fees were being paid under the table as parties or mini-festivals so the edict was ignored in less than 20 years.
The law was a codex in quite the same way as is the law today, with exactitude and uniformity, the law was really about who cold must the most persuasive rhetorical argument and it was the importance of rhetoric that meant that young men in pursuit of wealth became rhetoricians. they even managed to form scientific guilds in Rome, literally the Science of Persuasion.
So again in 100BC the Censors (like prefects only with the power to remove entire groups) closed down the schools because of the public bad these voices caused.
By 155AD these guilds had once again curbed free speech sufficiently to make them hated. The quote this time was that anyone foolish enough to think they could stand up to a paid rhetorician was in the same position of that of a corpse fighting off maggots.
Even when trying to mediate these paid pronouncers (I refuse to elevate them to being professors, thereby according them an undeserved accolade) on the good or the bad to an audience still cannot help themselves and will often through this lack of that audience at the Bar make matters so bad that even the kindest of souls will often fall out of favour further.
I know some Lawyers, the above is true.
But we have an ever growing base for complaints and a growing hurt within men that rather than being curbed or reined back is instead being given fuel and Oxygen to make an already bad situation worse.
I am of course talking about the modern Lawyer's tendency to once more swamp the to and fro of ideas and argument except outside of a courtroom.
There is a dark reality, Lawyers should not design the legal system, we have forgotten this for 40 years now and we are paying the price.
It is as if we have put foxes in charge of the hen-house.
Some reading this might say that surely only Lawyers can make the law and control the system.
This is wrong, deeply wrong, flawed to the point of shattering, the law is there to serve us not control or enslave us.
Often these days it seems that we have crooked lawyers representing crooked cases for crooked clients and in a precedential system like ours that is only going to be ruinous.
So we need a cull... to do as our Noble Greek and Roman forbears once did, reject their words, reject their meddling, the way to do this is simple.
Money, the money paid has to be dramatically cut and cases compulsorily assigned to those Lawyering for a living regardless of status.
The alternative to rejection is as always ejection and by that I mean the right to practice is removed.
Such measures would change the way law was used, meaning that it would be something least wanted... and that I think is what any sane man or woman wants from the law, for it to be the very last resort.
Thank you for reading.
M.
