Page images
PDF
EPUB

cial effort is made to overcome barriers imposed by poverty and cultural differences. Lawyers and law firms must take affirmative action to provide career opportunities for lawyers who are members of minority ethnic groups. We commend establishment of the Council on Legal Education Opportunities by the American Bar Association, the National Bar Association and the Association of American Law Schools, and the training and scholarship program the Council is organizing to encourage Negroes, Mexican-American and members of other disadvantaged groups to become lawyers.

4. The evolvement of predominantly Negro law schools, regardless of the circumstances surrounding their origin, must now be recognized as a reality and as a needed education resource. Many Negro students attend these schools. We encourage their strengthening and expansion. At the same time, the right of all minority group students to be considered for admission to all law schools without discrimination on account of race is now assured. We urge all law schools to facilitate admission of students from disadvantaged groups.

5. Law schools cannot be identical in their curricula. Each law school should be encouraged to determine whether its program of legal education responds to the needs of the bar and the society it serves. In this re-evaluation, each school should weight the need for professional preparation, for clinical work, education in the lawyer's role in legal and social planning, and research, including interdisciplinary research. While recognizing the relevance of the explosion of specialized knowledge in the behavioral sciences, law schools should keep in view their obligations to prepare lawyers for their roles as generalists.

6. Law schools should seek closer relationships with other parts of their universities and with each other to profit by and contribute to the advancement of knowledge. Law schools, in cooperation with the organized bar, should consider the development of programs of education and training for sub-professional and paraprofessional personnel.

7. The necessary growth of continuing legal education depends upon the sup port of the bar, the law schools and the judiciary. Greater cooperation among participating organizations, improved efficiency, and higher quality should be the aim. Continuing legal education can contribute to instruction in the law schools, and the law schools can in turn improve the quality of continuing legal education, if the relationships between the two are extended and strengthened. Judges should assist in education programs designed for the bar and participate in programs designed especially for them. Programs of continuing education for judges should be strengthened, and similar programs should be established for adjudicative officials in administrative agencies.

8. The quality and nature of bar examinations should be reassessed, particularly in the light of the influence they may have on law school curricula. The bar should consider developing alternative means to verify the competence of a new lawyer.

RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

1. Research is important to the national analysis and evaluation of legal services and institutions. There is need for detailed study of the effects of particular legal arrangements, and for basic and applied research into law. The conduct of such research will require closer connection between law and the behavioral sciences. Increases in the currently miniscule level of funding for such studies would generate important interdisciplinary work. We urge Congress to support agencies authorized to provide for research on the law, and to enact pending legislation to establish and fund a national law foundation. 2. The profession should increase its efforts to take advantage of the developing technology of electronic data processing. Possible uses of the computer range from the storage and systematic retrieval of legal materials, to the employment of simulation techniques and linear programming, to calculate the consequences of legally significant events. At the same time, the profession should seek to develop the law necessary to deal with computer technology.

JUSTICE AND RESPECT FOR LAW

1. The improvement in the organization and administration of our courts and the methods of selecting our judges remains a pressing necessity, in part because of rapid increases and changes in the work of the courts. We reaffirm that necessity. We make no recommendations on these subjects because the American Bar Association and the Twenty-Seventh American Assembly, The Courts, the Public and the Law Explosion, have spoken specifically to them. We urge implementa

tion of the proposals for improvement of judicial administration contained in those recommendations, except that which concerns automoblie accident cases, a matter we refer to below.

2. Equal access to the legal system requires not only the availability of counselors and advocates but also public subsidization of the other expenses of litigation for those who cannot afford them. These expenses include court fees, transcripts, deposition costs, supersedeas bonds and similar expenses often incurred in the defense or assertion of claims. Each jurisdiction should provide for waiver or public subsidization of all such expenses for persons who are otherwise unable to utilize the legal system.

3. Automobile accident claims are of vital concern to the public, the court and the bar. We commend the American Bar Association's determination to give objective and urgent study to the problem.

4. Instruction in law and legal processes should be a part of primary, secondary and college education. The legal profession should encourage programs of such instruction. As part of its responsibility regarding education of the public, lawyers should seek to explain court decisions, especially where unpopular, and to help the public understand that a lawyer's duty includes representation of unpopular clients.

5. Law enforcement must be provided the resources to carry out its responsi bilities firmly, capably and with sensitivity. Security in our daily lives depends upon this capability. The tranquility of our cities may depend upon the ability of law enforcement to demonstrate to the community that it deals justly both with the troubles of persons and with the troubles created by persons whose lives are touched by it.

Lawyers administering justice must take responsibility for assuring not only that these procedures are fair to the individual and the community but that they appear to be fair, to the end that justice be done and be known to be done. We urge that the institutions involved in law enforcement and prosecution, many of which are unduly fragmented, should be organized and financed on a scale sufficient to enable them to perform the tasks demanded of them.

Hon. WAYNE MORSE,

Chairman, Education Subcommittee,

UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS, Lawrence, Kans., April 1, 1968.

Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MORSE: This is a response to your letter of March 22, 1968, in which you request my comments concerning a proposed modification to S. 3098, the Higher Education Amendments of 1968, which, if adopted, would provide a program of matching grants for financing clinical activities in law schools. Although I have not had the opportunity to become acquainted with the specific proposal about which you inquire, I am happy to comment upon the idea generally.

It is my thought that the development of clinical methods of teaching in the law schools is the most exciting development in legal education during the past several decades. The objection has often been made that conventional legal education does not train the student for the practice of law. Generally, I think, the law schools do a good job in acquainting student with the concepts of the law which governs our society and developing in the student the capacity for legal analysis. Legal education is often deficient, I think, in that it fails to give the student any experience or insight in actually dealing with clients or in seeking solutions to concrete human problems. Other curricula in professional education have long included periods of supervised practial experience. Medical and dental students work in the hospitals and clinics. The training of public school teachers includes an extended period of supervised practice teaching. I feel strongly that similar methods of instruction can and should be utilized widely by the law schools of the country.

The increased awareness of the need for legal services among the poor provides a climate favorable to the development of clinical programs in law schools. It is now apparent that available legal manpower and the system currently employed for the distribution of legal services are not adequate to supply the needs of the poor in either civil or criminal cases.

The law schools can provide an important resource for augmenting the supply of legal services. I do not suggest that the law schools ought to be required to

assume the major responsibility for providing legal services to the poor. This responsibility should belong to the state and to the bar. The basic objective of the law school is to provide an effective program of legal education. On the other hand, if a by-product of new techniques in legal education is a significant community service, it would seem obvious that the merit of the program is enhanced.

During the past several years we at the University of Kansas School of Law have emphasized the clinical training of law students. Our program has four facets. Our students act as counsellors and advisors to inmates of the United States Penitentiary at Leavenworth, the Kansas State Penitentiary at Lansing, and other penal institutions in the vicinity. Another group of students assists assigned counsel in the criminal courts of Kansas City, Kansas in the defense of indigent persons charged with serious crimes. Another group of students assists in the neighborhood legal services program supported by the Office of Economic Opportunity in Kansas City, Kansas. Still a fourth group of students work as deputy probation officers in the local juvenile court, participating in all stages of juvenile court proceedings. All of these students are developing special skills and insights with respect to the actual administration of justice. They are being exposed to actual human problems in the context in which they arise. They are developing skills in communication and inter-personal relationships that are essential ingredients of effective advocacy.

From the foregoing comments, you may have inferred that I feel strongly that the underwriting of clinical programs in the law schools of the United States would be an excellent investment for the Government to undertake. The probable cost at each institution would obviously depend upon the nature and scope of the project and many other factors. Clinical training, if properly conducted, is expensive. A great deal of supervision is required. Not only is supervision necessary to protect the clients against possible student errors, but there must be a continuing process of critique and evaluation if the clinical experience is to be meaningful to the student. The experience of the several clinical programs with which I am familiar would indicate that a financial outlay of about $1,000 per year per student is required for an effective program. The cost of our program at the University of Kansas is presently somewhat more than the figure indicated. The additional expense here is occasioned by the fact that we are presently paying a substantial sum for services outside the law school. Our resources in the law school are augmented by the services of a half-time psychiatrist, a clinical psychologist, and other professional services. Also, our law school is located some distance from the place where the main activities are carried on. Hence, it is necessary that we reimburse the students for travel expense. Because of the expense involved in clinical training, I suspect that many law schools cannot afford it without outside help. Our project is presently being supported by a grant from the National Defender Project. During the last two academic years, our activity at Leavenworth has been supported by a grant from the Metzenbaum Human Relations Fund of Cleveland, Ohio. I am certain that we could not have undertaken the programs without this help. While we are making an effort to absorb the costs of the program in the regular law school budget, I suspect that some aspects of the program will necessarily be limited when we are required to proceed on our own

resources.

The optimum size of a program is, of course, related to the facilities for supervision available at the institution. We currently have fifty students enrolled in our several clinical programs. Three faculty members each contribute a significant amount of time to their supervision. Because our clinical program is multi-faceted, I think our group is somewhat larger than would ordinarily be regarded as the optimum size. Ordinarily, I should think that from twenty to twenty-five students would constitute the best sized group. This group would be large enough to engage in significant activity and would, at the same time, be small enough to be manageable. The supervision of a program involving twentyfive students would require, as a minimum, the service equivalent of one fulltime faculty member.

I hope that these comments may be useful to you and your committee. If I can provide further information concerning our project here at Kansas I should be happy to do so.

Very truly yours,

PAUL E. WILSON,
Professor of Law.

Hon. WAYNE MORSE,

U.S. DISTRICT COURT,

DISTRICT OF MONTANA,

Billings, Mont., March 28, 1968.

Chairman, Education Subcommittee, Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thank you for your letter of March 25, relative to the proposed amendment to S. 3098 to incorporate a section providing for matching grants for the financing in law schools of a program of curriculum support encompassing the clinical practice of the law.

Based upon our experience with the Montana Defender Project I am satisfied that such a program is feasible and would be highly beneficial to the participating law schools.

I am taking the liberty of sending a copy of your letter to Dean Robert E. Sullivan of the School of Law of the University of Montana for an estimate of the cost of the proposal outlined in your letter. As soon as I receive a reply, I shall write you fully.

With kindest regards, I am

Sincerely,

W. J. JAMESON.

Senator MORSE. I will reconvene after a 5-minute recess. (Brief recess.)

Senator MORSE. The committee will come to order.

We will now proceed with hearing the witness representing the Council on Graduate Education for Public Administration. Our first witness will be Mr. Brewster C. Denny, chairman and director of the Graduate School of Public Affairs, University of Washington. I am very glad to welcome a neighbor to the hearing. I am sorry that we don't see each other except in Washington. We are delighted to have you. You may proceed in your own way.

STATEMENT OF BREWSTER C. DENNY, DIRECTOR, GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON, SEATTLE, WASH.; AND CHAIRMAN, COUNCIL ON GRADUATE EDUCATION FOR PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Mr. DENNEY. Thank you very much, Senator Morse.

Mr. Chairman, Senator Yarborough, it is a distinct personal privilege to appear before this committee. I would like to submit my testimony and summarize it briefly and make a few comments, in the interests of time.

Senator MORSE. Mr. Denny's prepared statement will appear in the record at this point, and he may summarize it in his own way.

(The prepared statement and biographical sketch of Mr. Denny follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT OF BREWSTER C. DENNY, DIRECTOR, GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON; CHAIRMAN, COUNCIL ON GRADUATE EDUCATION FOR PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

It is a privilege to support Title XII of The Higher Education Amendments of 1968. I appear as a concerned citizen who believes that the future of the Republic depends in large measure on the quality and professional skill of those who serve it. We may talk of programs, budgets, offices, departments, branches and divisions, personnel and staff counts, management systems, planning programming and budget systems. But people-their skill, their training, their integrity, their loyalty, and their energy-are the heart and life of our domestic government. People, not agencies or bureaus, not even computers, make decisions,

dream, plan, make judgments, pass laws, administer, lead and follow. Thomas Jefferson knew this and viewed the education of citizens and public servants as the key to realizing his extravagant dreams for this great republic. His life-long devotion to education, in turn, was based on his devotion to the great democracy he helped to found. At no time in our history have a President and a Congress done more to realize Jefferson's dream in education than in these years of the mid-sixties. It is a special honor to appear before this great committee of the Senate. For it is here that these lasting and monumental contributions to education were developed and championed. It is also here and particularly germane to the legislation now before you that many of the great social, economic and health programs were criginated. For it is particularly appropriate and long overdue that the Senate should consider an imaginative program to recruit and educate the young men and women who will take the leadership in bringing these programs into reality.

In this context, the Education for the Public Service Title of the Higher Education Amendments of 1968, is truly landmark legislation. The federal government, either through direct educational programs such as those administered by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, or through programs of other departments of government such as NSF, AEC, HUD, Interior, NASA, etc., supports a rich array of educational and research fields very nearly the full range of a modern university. Many of these programs aid in some indirect way or other the preparation of people for public service. For the most part, however, in all programs to date the education of public servants as public servants is in the category of a side-effect, a need also to be served. Thus doctors, physicists, nurses, librarians, biologists, and engineers are educated to perform their vital professional roles in our society, and many of them perform those roles while employed by government. But the bill before you today would be the first direct program for the education of public servants. This bill, then, is of vital and historic importance. This legislation comes at a time of crisis in our cities, of desperate shortages of trained public servants to meet new challenges and to replace those now leaving active service at the end of long and fruitful careers. Most important of all, this legislation comes at a time when the largest generation of young people in our history is passing from adolescence to adulthood and when they are choosing a profession from the vast array of opportunities in this largely affluent society. It is of critical importance that every possible step be taken to assure that the very ablest and most highly motivated of these young people be attracted to the public service as a career. The proposed legislation, in my judgment, is the single step the Congress might best take to assure this. Let me explain this assertion in some detail.

More and more these days, young people, particularly the most gifted and highly motivated ones, are making career choices at that stage in their undergraduate education when they choose the kind of professional or graduate special education which is increasingly required to compete in modern technological society. The attractiveness of graduate or professional programs as seen through the eyes of these young people becomes the critical point of the recruitment of the professions which these programs serve. A significant feature of the recruitment process is the availability of financial assistance as well as an attractive and exciting program.

The fellowships provided in Part B of Title XII (Sec. 1211-1212–1213–12141215) would provide the critical ingredient to this recruitment process and represent, in my judgment, the single most important feature of Title XII.

This legislation also meets head-on a critical need of today's college generation: the search for commitment and involvement. No simple or single-cause analysis will explain hippies and the more violent activists on our campuses, or the vast millions of students whose frustrations and anxieties this small minority sometimes seems to express. But at the heart of any explanation is the search for a worthwhile commitment and involvement. This bill, like the Peace Corps, will help to serve this deep need and provide the opportunity for a constructive commitment.

Before turning to other portions of Title XII, let me note first the great demand for the kind of persons that the fellowship program will recruit and educate. I hope that governors, mayors, county commissioners, and federal executives will testify to their need. For it is these people, facing the great challenges of contemporary public life, who can best bear witness to the urgency. It is they and their principal subordinate officers who are now seeking to staff the challenging new programs designed to meet critical needs in our society.

« PreviousContinue »