FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   929   930   931   932   933   934   935   936   937   938   939   940   941   942   943   944   945   946   947   948   949   950   951   952   953  
954   955   956   957   958   959   960   961   962   963   964   965   966   967   968   969   970   971   972   973   974   975   976   977   978   >>   >|  
judgment in those cases is founded. It is sufficient to say they are conclusive of the present case. The judgment of the State court is, therefore, affirmed. D. W. MIDDLETON, C. S. C. U. S. Mr. Justice BRADLEY gave the following: I concur in the judgment of the court in this case by which the judgment of the Supreme Court of Illinois is affirmed, but not for the reasons specified in the opinion just read. The claim of the plaintiff, who is a married woman, to be admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor-at-law, is based upon the supposed right of every person, man or woman, to engage in any lawful employment for a livelihood. The Supreme Court of Illinois denied the application on the ground that, by the common law, which is the basis of laws of Illinois, only men were admitted to the bar, and the Legislature had not made any change in this respect, but had simply provided no person should be admitted to practice as attorney or counselor without having previously obtained a license for that purpose from two justices of the Supreme Court, and that no person should receive a license without first obtaining a certificate from the court of some county of his good moral character. In other respects it was left to the discretion of the court to establish the rules by which admission to the profession should be determined. The court, however, regarded itself as bound by at least two limitations. One was that it should establish such terms of admission as would promote the proper administration of justice, and the other that it should not admit any persons, or class of persons, not intended by the Legislature to be admitted, even though not expressly excluded by statute. In view of this latter limitation the court felt compelled to deny the application of females to be admitted as members of the bar. Being contrary to the rules of the common law and the usages of Westminster Hall from time immemorial, it could not be supposed that the Legislature had intended to adopt any different rule. The claim that, under the XIV. Amendment of the Constitution, which declares that no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States,
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   929   930   931   932   933   934   935   936   937   938   939   940   941   942   943   944   945   946   947   948   949   950   951   952   953  
954   955   956   957   958   959   960   961   962   963   964   965   966   967   968   969   970   971   972   973   974   975   976   977   978   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

admitted

 

judgment

 
Supreme
 

Illinois

 

person

 

Legislature

 

affirmed

 

common

 

license

 

practice


supposed

 

counselor

 

attorney

 

establish

 

application

 

intended

 
persons
 

admission

 

promote

 

administration


proper

 

justice

 

discretion

 

profession

 
respects
 

determined

 

limitations

 
regarded
 

Amendment

 
Constitution

declares
 
citizens
 

United

 

States

 

immunities

 

privileges

 

enforce

 
abridge
 
immemorial
 

limitation


compelled

 
statute
 
expressly
 

excluded

 

females

 

Westminster

 
usages
 

contrary

 

members

 

receive