Legal history or the history of law is the study of how law has evolved and why it changed. Legal history is closely connected to the development of civilizations and is set in the wider context of social history. Among certain jurists and historians of legal process it has been seen as the recording of the evolution of laws and the technical explanation of how these laws have evolved with the view of better understanding the origins of various legal concepts, some consider it a branch of intellectual history. Twentieth-century historians have viewed legal history in a more contextualized manner more in line with the thinking of social historians.
They have looked at legal institutions as complex systems of rules, players and symbols and have seen these elements interact with society to change, adapt, resist or promote certain aspects of civil society. Such legal historians have tended to analyze case histories from the parameters of social science inquiry, using statistical methods, analyzing class distinctions among litigants, petitioners and other players in various legal processes. By analyzing case outcomes, transaction costs, number of settled cases they have begun an analysis of legal institutions, practices, procedures and briefs that give us a more complex picture of law and society than the study of jurisprudence, case law and civil codes can achieve.
India has a recorded legal history starting from the Vedic ages and some sort of civil law system may have been in place during the Bronze Age and the Indus Valley civilization.[ii] Notwithstanding this, the development of โlawโ as a profession is only a recent phenomenon. The Indian legal profession is one of the largest in the world and plays a vital role in the worldโs largest democracy. While the roots of this profession lie before Independence, since then the profession has evolved immensely and currently faces various challenges; the most important being to provide access across the profession, ensure ethical foundations and modernize the practice across the board.
A well-organized and independent legal profession is an essential condition for proper administration of justice.[iii] It is also a necessary ingredient and guarantor of the rule of law.[iv] Its proper organization and maintenance of its independence are, therefore, necessary for a good and just society. This project, traces the history of our efforts in that direction. It will be too ambitious to trace that history from the time of ancient or even Muslim rulers because firstly, we have very little information about that and secondly, our present legal profession, like most of the other legal institutions, is based on the British model. Therefore, we trace the history of the Legal Profession in India form the advent of British rule.
The authors of the instant research hope that this piece of work provides the readers with a decent understanding of the history of the Legal Profession in India. The instant work shall give a brief highlight to the development of the Legal Profession in the world before addressing India.
CHAPTER 2
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION IN THE WORLD
The development of the legal profession has received a lot of attention from scholars. This can be seen in Paul Brandโs The Origins of the English Legal Profession (1992), and J.H. Bakerโs The Legal Profession and The Common Law โ Historical Essays (1986). The eminent jurist Roscoe Pound also wrote The Lawyer from Antiquity to Modern Times (1953).
In Peter Coss (Ed.), Thomas Wrightโs Political Songs of England (1996), the following verse occurs:
โAttorneys in country, they get silver for naught;
They make men begin what they never had thought;
And when they come to the ring, they hop if they can.
All they can get that way, they think all is won for them with skill.
No man should trust them, so false are they in the bile.โ
2.1. ANCIENT GREECE
The earliest people who could be described as โlawyersโ were probably the orators of ancient Athens. However, Athenian orators faced serious structural obstacles. First, there was a rule that individuals were supposed to plead their own cases, which was soon bypassed by the increasing tendency of individuals to ask a โfriendโ for assistance.[v] However, around the middle of the fourth century, the Athenians disposed of the perfunctory request for a friend.[vi] Second, a more serious obstacle, which the Athenian orators never completely overcame, was the rule that no one could take a fee to plead the cause of another. This law was widely disregarded in practice but was never abolished, which meant that orators could never present themselves as legal professionals or experts.[vii] They had to uphold the legal fiction that they were merely an ordinary citizen generously helping out a friend for free, and thus they could never organize into a real professionโwith professional associations and titles and all the other pomp and circumstanceโlike their modern counterparts.[viii] Therefore, if one narrows the definition to those men who could practice the legal profession openly and legally, then the first lawyers would have to be the orators of ancient Rome.
2.2. ANCIENT ROME
A law enacted in 204 BC barred Roman advocates from taking fees, but the law was widely ignored.[ix] The ban on fees was abolished by Emperor Claudius, who legalized advocacy as a profession and allowed the Roman advocates to become the first lawyers who could practice openlyโbut he also imposed a fee ceiling of 10,000 sesterces.[x] This was apparently not much money; the Satires of Juvenal complain that there was no money in working as an advocate.[xi]
Like their Greek contemporaries, early Roman advocates were trained in rhetoric, not law, and the judges before whom they argued were also not law-trained.[xii] But very early on, unlike Athens, Rome developed a class of specialists who were learned in the law, known as jurisconsults (iuris consulti).[xiii] Jurisconsults were wealthy amateurs who dabbled in law as an intellectual hobby; they did not make their primary living from it.[xiv] They gave legal opinions (responsa) on legal issues to all comers (a practice known as publice respondere).[xv] Roman judges and governors would routinely consult with an advisory panel of jurisconsults before rendering a decision, and advocates and ordinary people also went to jurisconsults for legal opinions.[xvi] Thus, the Romans were the first to have a class of people who spent their days thinking about legal problems, and this is why their law became so โprecise, detailed, and technical.โ[xvii]
During the Roman Republic and the early Roman Empire, jurisconsults and advocates were unregulated, since the former were amateurs and the latter were technically illegal.[xviii] Any citizen could call himself an advocate or a legal expert, though whether people believed him would depend upon his personal reputation. This changed once Claudius legalized the legal profession. By the start of the Byzantine Empire, the legal profession had become well-established, heavily regulated, and highly stratified.[xix] The centralization and bureaucratization of the profession was apparently gradual at first but accelerated during the reign of Emperor Hadrian.[xx] At the same time, the jurisconsults went into decline during the imperial period.[xxi]
In the words of Fritz Schulz, โby the fourth-century things had changed in the eastern Empire: advocates now were really lawyers.โ[xxii] For example, by the fourth century, advocates had to be enrolled on the bar of a court to argue before it, they could only be attached to one court at a time, and there were restrictions (which came and went depending upon who was emperor) on how many advocates could be enrolled at a particular court.[xxiii] By the 380s, advocates were studying law in addition to rhetoric (thus reducing the need for a separate class of jurisconsults); in 460, Emperor Leo imposed a requirement that new advocates seeking admission had to produce testimonials from their teachers; and by the sixth century, a regular course of legal study lasting about four years was required for admission.[xxiv] Claudiusโs fee ceiling lasted all the way into the Byzantine period, though by then it was measured at 100 solidi.[xxv] Of course, it was widely evaded, either through demands for maintenance and expenses or a sub rosa barter transaction.[xxvi] The latter was cause for disbarment.[xxvii]
The notaries (tabelliones) appeared in the late Roman Empire. Like their modern-day descendants, the civil law notaries, they were responsible for drafting wills, conveyances, and contracts.[xxviii] They were ubiquitous and most villages had one.[xxix] In Roman times, notaries were widely considered to be inferior to advocates and jurisconsults.[xxx] Roman notaries were not law-trained; they were barely literate hacks who wrapped the simplest transactions in mountains of legal jargon since they were paid by the line.[xxxi]
2.3. MIDDLE AGES
After the fall of the western Empire and the onset of the Dark Ages, the legal profession of Western Europe collapsed. As James Brundage has explained: โ[by 1140], no one in Western Europe could properly be described as a professional lawyer or professional canonists in anything like the modern sense of the term โprofessional.โ โ[xxxii] However, from 1150 onward, a small but increasing number of men became experts in canon law but only in furtherance of other occupational goals, such as serving the Roman Catholic Church as priests.[xxxiii] From 1190 to 1230, however, there was a crucial shift in which some men began to practice canon law as a lifelong profession in itself.[xxxiv]
The legal professionโs return was marked by the renewed efforts of church and state to regulate it. In 1231 two French councils mandated that lawyers had to swear an oath of admission before practicing before the bishopโs courts in their regions, and a similar oath was promulgated by the papal legate in London in 1237.[xxxv] During the same decade, Frederick II, the emperor of the Kingdom of Sicily, imposed a similar oath in his civil courts.[xxxvi] By 1250 the nucleus of a new legal profession had clearly formed.[xxxvii] The new trend towards professionalization culminated in a controversial proposal at the Second Council of Lyon in 1275 that all ecclesiastical courts should require an oath of admission.[xxxviii] Although not adopted by the council, it was highly influential in many such courts throughout Europe.[xxxix] The civil courts in England also joined the trend towards professionalization; in 1275 a statute was enacted that prescribed punishment for professional lawyers guilty of deceit, and in 1280 the mayorโs court of the city of London promulgated regulations concerning admission procedures, including the administering of an oath.[xl]
2.4. LEGAL PROFESSION IN ENGLAND
In England, the admission of lawyers has been regulated since the middle of the 13th century. In the late 13th century, three critical regulations were adopted[xli] โ (a) the Statute of Westminster I, chapter 29 (1275); (b) The London Ordinance of 1280; and (c) the Ordinance of 1292, de Attornatis et Apprenticiis. During the medieval period, further regulations were enacted, called the Statute, 4 Henry IV, chapter 18 (1402) and the Ordinance, 33 Henry VI, chapter 7 (1455). In addition, judges have always used their inherent power to control the admission of lawyers and check their misconduct.
2.5. PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT AND THE LAW SOCIETY
The attorneys were expelled from the principal Inns of Court in the 16th century and in 1739 they formed a professional group called โSociety of Gentleman-Practicers in the Courts of Law and Equityโ.[xlii] Thus the Law Society was born, though it was not until 1986 that the Law Society formed a committee to collect and draft principles of professional conduct. Now there exists the Guide to Professional Conduct of Solicitors reflecting the ideals of modern solicitors as well. Both branches of the English legal profession had the same core duties over the centuries of litigation: fairness, competence, loyalty, confidentiality, reasonable fees and service to the poor.
Nicholas, in Introduction to Roman law, stated that the Roman jurists were not paid for their work, but were supposed to function due to a keen sense of public service. In Europe, lawyers were under an oath, which was an essence, a condensed code of legal ethics.[xliii]
In France, lawyers had to take an oath which included a pledge of care, diligence and an agreement to support only just causes. In France, the oaths were taken by ecclesiastical lawyers and the French legal tradition had a lasting influence even outside France in Switzerland and other parts of Europe.[xliv]
The concept of a lawyer as an officer of the Court arises from the Roman idea of a lawyer being an โadvocatusโ, who when called upon by the praetor to assist in the cause of a client, was solemnly reprimanded to โavoid artifice and circumlocutionโ.[xlv]
CHAPTER 3
HISTORY OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION IN INDIA
3.1. INTRODUCTORY
The Legal Profession is an important limb of the machinery for the administration of justice. Without a well-organized profession of law, the courts would not be in a position to administer justice effectively as the evidence in favor or against the parties to a suit cannot be properly marshaled, facts cannot be properly articulated and the best legal arguments in support or against the case of the parties cannot be put forth before the court. โA well-organized system of judicial administration postulates a properly equipped and efficient Bar.โ[xlvi] It is, therefore, in the fitness of things to take note briefly of the development of the legal profession in India.
The history of the legal profession in India can be traced back to the establishment of the First British Court in Bombay in 1672 by Governor Aungier. The admission of attorneys was placed in the hands of the Governor-in-Council and not with the Court. Prior to the establishment of the Mayorโs Courts in 1726 in Madras and Calcutta, there were no legal practitioners.
3.2. MAYORโS COURT
In the Charter of 1726, which established the Mayorโs Courts at the three Presidency Towns, no specific provision was made laying down any particular qualifications for the persons who would be entitled to act or plead as legal practitioners in these courts. Presumably, it was left to these courts to regulate this matter by rules of practice which these courts were authorized to frame.[xlvii] No change was effected in this position when a fresh Charter was issued in 1753.[xlviii] No organized legal profession came into being in the Presidency Towns during the period of the mayorโs Courts.[xlix] They who practiced law were devoid of any legal training or any knowledge of the law. They had adopted the profession in the absence of anything better to do. Quite a few of these so-called lawyers were the dismissed servants of the Company.[l]
SUPREME COURTS
3.3.1. Regulation Act, 1773.
The first concrete step in the direction of organizing a legal profession in India was taken in 1774 when the Supreme Court was established at Calcutta. The Regulating Act, 1773, empowered the Supreme Court to frame rules of procedure as it thought necessary for the administration of justice and due execution of its powers. Under CI.11 of its Charter, the Supreme Court was empowered to approve, admit and enroll such and so many Advocates and Attorneys-at-law, as to the Court shall deem fit. Attorneys of record were to be authorized to appear and plead and act for the suitors in the Supreme Court. The court was to have the power to remove any Advocate or Attorney on a reasonable cause. No other person whatever, but Advocates or Attorneys so admitted and enrolled, were to be allowed to appear and plead, or act in the Court for or on behalf of such suitors.
Thus the persons entitled to practice before the Supreme Court could be Advocates and Attorneys. The term Advocate at the time extended only to the English and the Irish barristers and the members of the faculty of Advocates in Scotland. The expression โAttorneysโ then meant only British Attorneys or Solicitors. As CI.11 of the Charter prohibited any other person whatsoever to appear and plead or act, it would appear that the Calcutta Supreme Court was, from its very inception, a completely exclusive preserve for members of the British legal profession, namely, the British Barristers, Advocates, and Attorneys. The indigenous Indian legal practitioner had no entry in this Court. The Charter of 1774 introduced the British system of legal practice in Calcutta.[li]
The similar position obtained in the two other Supreme Courts at Bombay and Madras. Thus, in the three Supreme Courts, the only persons who were entitled to practice were the British Barristers, Advocates, and Attorneys. The Indians had no right to appear before these Courts. This continued to be the position all through the existence of these Courts.
Under CI.11 of the Charter, the Supreme Court at Calcutta could admit Advocates and Attorneys who could โappear, plead and act for the suitors of the Court.โ But, the Supreme Court provided for the Advocates and Attorneys to exercise the ordinary powers of their respective professions-Advocates having power to appear and plead and Attorneys to appear and act, for the suitors. Similar was the position in other Supreme Courts as well. Thus, the two grades of the legal practice became distinct and separate as they were in England. Commenting on the position prevailing at this time, the Supreme Court of India observed in Aswini Kumar Ghosh v Arbind Bose:[lii]
โThough the Supreme Court was given by the Charter Acts and the Letters Patent establishing them, power to enroll advocates who could be authorized by the rules to act as well as to plead in the Supreme Courts, Rules were made empowering advocates only to appear and plead and not to act, while attorneys were enrolled and authorised to act and not to plead. In the Sudder courts and the courts subordinate thereto, pleaders who obtained a certificate from those courts were allowed both to act and plead.โ
3.4.5. The Legal Practitioners Act,1846
The Legal Practitioners Act (1 of 1846), which was the first All-India law concerning the pleaders in the mofussil, made several important innovations, namely:
1) The office of the pleaders in the courts of the Company was thrown open to all persons of whatever nation or religion, provided he has duly certified (in such manner as directed by the Sadar Courts) to be of good character and duly qualified for the other office. Thus, religious test was abolished for enrolment as a Pleader.
2) Every barrister enrolled in any of Her Majestyโs Courts in India was made eligible to plead in the Sadar Adalats subject to the rules of those Courts applicable to pleaders as regards as language or any other matter.
3) Vakils were allowed freedom to enter into agreement with their clients for their fees for professional services. This Act is regarded as โthe first charter of the legal professionโ[lix] although it left unsolved the important question of the right of vakils to practice in the Supreme Courts.[lx]
The Legal Practitioners Act, 1853 (Act XX of 1853), declared every Attorney on the roll of any of Her Majestyโs Supreme Courts to be entitled to be plead in any of the Companyโs Sadar Adalat. The Barristers and Attorneys of the Supreme Courts were permitted to plead in the Companyโs Adalat (subordinate to the Sadar Adalats) as well. Thus, while Barristers and practitioners were rigorously kept out of the three Supreme Courts. The reason was that the authorities held a poor opinion of the native lawyers and it was thought that appearance of English Barristers in the Companyโs Adalats would improve the situation.[lxi]
The Act also did away with the system of compulsory attendance of the pleaders in the court to which they were attached. Henceforth no pleader was bound to attend in any court of company on any day fixed for the transaction of civil business or to notify the court his inability to attend unless he was employed in some business or cause which according to the court practice, might be heard or transacted herein on the day.[lxii]
3.4.6. Pleaders, Mukhtars and Revenue Agents
For long there functioned non-licensed inferior grades of practitioners in the mofussil, known as mukhtars, who practiced in criminal courts as well as acted as solicitors for the pleaders. There also functioned revenue agents in revenue offices. All these were recognized and brought under control of the courts for the first time through the pleaders, Mukhtar, and Revenue Agents Act XX of 1865. The High Courts were authorized to make the rules for the qualifications, admission and enrollment of proper persons to be Pleader, Mukhters, for the fee to be paid for the examination, admission and enrolled. Revenue Agents who worked in the revenue offices and courts were also given status as legal practitioners by this Act. They were deemed to be the lowest in grade and did not play a significant part in the development of the legal profession.[lxiii]
3.5. HIGH COURTS
3.5.1. Three Categories of Practitioners
In 1861, legislation was passed by the British Parliament to establish High Courts at Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay. At this time, there were in existence three bodies of practitioners in the Supreme Courts and, the Sadar Adalats-Advocates, Attorneys and Vakils. CI9 of the Letters Patent of 1865 of the High Court of Calcutta empowered the Court โto approve, admit and enroll such and so many Advocates, Vakils and Attorneys as to the said High Court shall deem fit.โ These persons were โauthorized to appear for the suitors of the High Court, and to plead or to act, or to plead and act for the said suitors, according to as High Court may by its rules and directions determine, and subject to such rules and directions.โ[lxiv]
#legal#professiona



















