Volume 5 Number 1 Entering students who were recipients of National Honor Scholarships from their respective colleges and universities, follow­ ing a luncheon in their honor. In the 1955 entering class, there are National Honor Scholars representing the following institu­ tions: Albion College, Amherst College, Antioch College, Beloit College, Bowdoin College, Brown University, Colby College, Colgate University, Dartmouth College, DePauw College, Hamilton College, Harvard University, Haverford College, Knox College, University of Maine, Maryville College, Michigan State University, Oberlin College, Ohio Wesleyan University, Pomona College, Reed College, St. Olaf's College, Southern Methodist University, Swarthmore College, Syracuse University, Trinity College, Wabash College, Wesleyan University, Whitman College, Whittier College, Wittenberg College, and Yale University. 2 The Law School Record Vol. 5, No.1 The Class of 1958 At the beginning of the Autumn Quarter, The Law School welcomed its largest entering class in many years. One hundred and thirty-two students, chosen from among 432 applicants, began the work of The Law School. Considerable interest has been expressed by alumni in where our students come from, in terms both of their home communities and of the schools from which they received their undergraduate training. The student body currently numbers 311; these students have attended 159 different colleges and universities located in all sections of the United States and overseas. Institutions currently represented in our student body are: University of Alabama Albion College Allegheny College Amherst College Antioch College University of Athens Aurora College Austin College Baghdad Law School Bard College Bates College The Raymond Scholars. Left to right: Terry Sandalow, Beloit College Chicago, B.A. University of Chicago; Frederic P. Roehr III, Boston University Kansas City, Missouri, B.A. Rice Institute; Solomon Gut­ Bowdoin College stein, Chicago, A.B. University of Chicago. Not pictured: Bradley University James E. Beaver, Itasca, Illinois, B.A. Wesleyan University. Brandeis University Brigham Young University University of Hamburg Brooklyn College Hamilton College Brown University Harvard University Bryn Mawr College Haverford College University of Buffalo University of Hawaii University of California Hebrew University University of California (L.A.) Hobart College Carleton College Hope College Central State College College of Idaho University of Chicago University of Illinois Clark University Illinois Institute of Technology Colby College Indiana University Colgate University John Marshall Law School University of Colorado Joliet Junior College Columbia University Kalamazoo College University of Connecticut University of Kansas Cornell University University of Kentucky Culver-Stockton College Kenyon College Dartmouth College Knox College DePaul University Lafayette College DePauw University Lake Forest College Drake University Lincoln University Earlham College London School of Economics Far Eastern University Louisiana State University George Washington Law School University of Louisville Georgetown University Loyola University Goethe University Macalester College L'Universite de Grenoble University of Maine Grinnell College Continued on page 14 Vol. 5, No.1 The University of Chicago Law School The Wormser Scholar, Robert V. Zener, Pittsburgh, Penn­ The Phi Sigma Delta Scholar, Lewis Ginsberg, Chicago, sylvania, B.A. University of Chicago. A.R. University of Chicago. The Ecko Foundation Scholar, John G. Satter, Jr., Vermil­ The Mary Beecher Scholar, Miriam Chesslin, New York, lion, South Dakota, A.B. University of South Dakota A.B. Western College for Women, Oxford, Ohio. 4 The Law School Record Vol. 5, No.1 sponsors and agencies the expert services Law Revision as a Teaching Tool drafting drafting which it was thought that the legislators needed. and Public Responsibility As I said before, Dean Ames regarded law revision as individual effort. He did not regard legislation and legis­ of a Law School lative drafting as part of the teaching process. It is true that the individual activity of a professor often resulted By ALLISON DUNHAM in employed or volunteer student assistants of the profes­ This is the substance of a which was prepared for I_ talk sor receiving training in statutory drafting. The courses at the alumni meeting at the American Bar delivery on legislation first introduced to the law curriculum some Association convention in August.] forty years ago by Professor Freund of our law school have not had as their main emphasis working out prin­ From the beginning of the modern university law school, ciples of legislative drafting. For the most part these it has been a factor in statutory reform. In 1901 Dean courses have been designed to train students in the art Ames of the Harvard Law School in his address on and professional skill of statutory interpretation and in "The Vocation of the Law Professor" spoke of the the formalities of legislative enactment. These courses "wholesome influence which the professor may exert as have not had the same emphasis on principles of legis­ an expert counselor in legislation, either by staying or lative drafting and the application of such principles to guiding the hand of the legislator." Even a partial list particular legislative proposals as the more traditional of the state and national legislation of which a law pro­ law-school courses have had under the case method. Pro­ fessor was a counselor or draftsman is an impressive fessor Freund was a notable exception. His book in 1916 demonstration of the impact of the professor on law on legislative drafting and its principles is almost the last reform. Thus from our own law school we have the and book on this in the United Uniform Trust Act and the Uniform Conditional Sales only subject attempted States. Act by Professor Bogert; the Uniform Illegitimacy Act During the last three years the Law Revision Group at and a proposed city charter for Chicago by Professor The Law School has undertaken a experiment in Freund; the Uniform Trust Receipts Act by Professor pilot law-school in the service function of Llewellyn; and the Uniform Commercial Code drafted organized activity law revision. It has appeared to us that on the service side by many professors, among which were Llewellyn, Ment­ we have the most to contribute if we provide legislative schikoff, and Dunham of our law school. This is not a drafting facilities for the judiciary, executive departments complete list even of our own school's contributions, but of government, and civic and trade associations that do it is sufficient to illustrate the point. Dean Ames envisioned not have access to the services of official legislative agen­ this part of the law professor's occupation as primarily the cies. It further appeared to us that, the more student work personal activity of an individual professor of law and in drafting approximated real-life experience, the better not as an organized institutional function. And such it the Thus it would be better for students to work has been with a few notable exceptions. Thus the Legis­ training. on which is prepared for introduction lative Drafting Fund of Columbia Law School in 1911 is legislation being into a than it would be for them simply largely responsible for the Office of Legislative Counsel legislature to work on drafting model legislation embodying the in each of the houses of Congress and of the similar agen­ "better" view of a particular legal problem. Thus the cies in some forty or more state legislatures. The thrust service function and the function should and of the Columbia project and of the official agencies there­ training could be closely integrated. after established was that expert draftsmen could ease the our we undertook to do for burden of the individual legislator and result in at least In pilot experiment drafting an for civic asso­ better-drafted legislation. the judiciary, for executive department, and for trade associations in order to some Almost simultaneously with the movement for legisla­ ciations, get idea of the need for this service and also in order to tive drafting services for legislators, however, came new get some idea of the involved when a law-school insight into the legislative process: the sponsoring legis­ problems institution drafts for and who have more lator was not the law-writer. The real proposer of legisla­ groups persons or less control over decisions inherent in tion introduced by a particular legislator was some execu­ policy any legis­ to offer each three a lative We also undertook year tive agency of government, a judicial conference, civic drafting. seminars in in which the students group, or a trade association. These sponsors not only do legislative drafting could in real not have access to the expert official draftsmen in the Office get training drafting legislation. of Legislative Counsel but do not have their own expert The Law Revision Group consists of a faculty com­ draftsman but must rely on a lawyer or a law professor mittee of which I am chairman and a legislative drafts­ man. Revision Studies who, even if not serving in a pro bono publico capacity, The pamphlet entitled Law No.1, some have embodies some of the re­ finds law revision only one among many activities. Thus which of you seen, the official drafting agencies do not provide for the real sults of our work over the last three years. This pamphlet Vol. 5, No.1 The University of Chicago Law School 5 A display of materials concerning the School's UJork in Law Revison, which is described elsewhere in this issue in an article by Professor Allison Dunham. contains a study and statute undertaken at the request form act for charitable trusts for the Commissioners on of a member of the judiciary and a study and statute Uniform State Laws and the Council of State Govern­ undertaken at the request of a civic group. The subject ments and a uniform postconviction act for the Commis­ of the former was a new habitual offender act for Illi­ sioners on Uniform State Laws.