法律的道路中英文版

法律的道路（中英文版）ThePathoftheLawbyOliverWendellHolmes,Jr.10HarvardLawReview457(1897)Whenwestudylawwearenotstudyingamysterybutawell-knownprofession.Wearestudyingwhatweshallwantinordertoappearbeforejudges,ortoadvisepeopleinsuchawayastokeepthemoutofcourt・Thereasonwhyitisaprofession,whypeoplewillpaylawyerstoargueforthemortoadvisethem,isthatinsocietieslikeoursthecommandofthepublicforceisintrustedtothejudgesincertaincases,andthewholepowerofthestatewillbeputforth,ifnecessary,tocarryouttheirjudgmentsanddecrees・Peoplewanttoknowunderwhatcircumstancesandhowfartheywillruntheriskofcomingagainstwhatissomuchstrongerthanthemselves,andhenceitbecomesabusinesstofindoutwhenthisdangeristobefeared.Theobjectofourstudy,then,isprediction，thepredictionoftheincideneeofthepublicforcethroughtheinstrumentalityofthecourts.Themeansofthestudyareabodyofreports,oftreatises,andofstatutes,inthiscountryandinEngland,extendingbackforsixhundredyears,andnowincreasingannuallybyhundreds.Inthesesibyllineleavesaregatheredthescatteredpropheciesofthepastuponthecasesinwhichtheaxewillfall・Thesearewhatproperlyhavebeencalledtheoraclesofthelaw.Farthemostimportantandprettynearlythewholemeaningofeveryneweffortoflegalthoughtistomakethesepropheciesmoreprecise,andtogeneralizethemintoathoroughlyconnectedsystem・Theprocessisone,fromalawyer'sstatementofacase,eliminatingasitdoesallthedramaticelementswithwhichhisclientsstoryhasclothedit,andretainingonlythefactsoflegalimport,uptothefinalanalysesandabstractuniversalsoftheoreticjurisprudenee.Thereasonwhyalawyerdoesnotmentionthathisclientworeawhitehatwhenhemadeacontract,whileMrs.Quicklywouldbesuretodwelluponitalongwiththeparcelgiltgobletandthesea-coalfire,isthatheforeseesthatthepublicforcewillactinthesamewaywhateverhisclienthaduponhishead.Itistomaketheprophecieseasiertoberememberedandtobeunderstoodthattheteachingsofthedecisionsofthepastareputintogeneralpropositionsandgatheredintotextbooks,orthatstatutesarepassedinageneralform.Theprimaryrightsanddutieswithwhichjurisprudeneebusiesitselfagainarenothingbutprophecies.Oneofthemanyevileffectsoftheconfusionbetweenlegalandmoralideas,aboutwhichIshallhavesomethingtosayinamoment,isthattheoryisapttogetthecartbeforethehorse,andconsidertherightorthedutyassomethingexistingapartfromandindependentoftheconsequencesofitsbreach,towhichcertainsanctionsareaddedafterward.But,asIshalltrytoshow,alegaldutysocalledisnothingbutapredictionthatifamandoesoromitscertainthingshewillbemadetosufferinthisorthatwaybyjudgmentofthecourt;andsoofalegalright.Thenumberofourpredictionswhengeneralizedandreducedtoasystemisnotunmanageablylarge.Theypresentthemselvesasafinitebodyofdogmawhichmaybemasteredwithinareasonabletime・Itisagreatmistaketobefrightenedbytheever-increasingnumberofreports.Thereportsofagivenjurisdictioninthecourseofagenerationtakeupprettymuchthewholebodyofthelaw,andrestateitfromthepresentpointofview.Wecouldreconstructthecorpusfromthemifallthatwentbeforewereburned.Theuseoftheearlierreportsismainlyhistorical,auseaboutwhichIshallhavesomethingtosaybeforeIhavefinished.Iwish,ifIcan,tolaydownsomefirstprinciplesforthestudyofthisbodyofdogmaorsystematizedpredictionwhichwecallthelaw,formenwhowanttouseitastheinstrumentoftheirbusinesstoenablethemtoprophesyintheirturn,and,asbearinguponthestudy,Iwishtopointoutanidealwhichasyetourlawhasnotattained・Thefirstthingforabusinesslikeunderstandingofthematteristotinderstanditslimits,andthereforeIthinkitdesirableatoncetopointoutanddispelaconfusionbetweenmoralityandlaw,whichsometimesrisestotheheightofconscioustheory,andmoreoftenandindeedconstantlyismakingtroubleindetailwithoutreachingthepointofconsciousness.Youcanseeveryplainlythatabadmanhasasmuchreasonasagoodoneforwishingtoavoidanencounterwiththepublicforce,andthereforeyoucanseethepracticalimportanceofthedistinctionbetweenmoralityandlaw.Amanwhocaresnothingforanethicalrulewhichisbelievedandpractisedbyhisneighborsislikelyneverthelesstocareagooddealtoavoidbeingmadetopaymoney,andwillwanttokeepoutofjailifhecan.ItakeitforgrantedthatnohearerofminewillmisinterpretwhatIhavetosayastheIanguageofcynicism・Thelawisthewitnessandexternaldepositofourmorallife.Itshistoryisthehistoryofthemoraldevelopmentoftherace・Thepracticeofit,inspiteofpopularjests,tendstomakegoodcitizensandgoodmen.WhenIemphasizethediffereneebetweenlawandmoralsIdosowithrefereneetoasingleend,thatoflearningandunderstandingthelaw.Forthatpurposeyoumustdefinitelymasteritsspecificmarks,anditisforthatthatIaskyouforthemomenttoimagineyourselvesindifferenttootherandgreaterthings.Idonotsaythatthereisnotawiderpointofviewfromwhichthedistinctionbetweenlawandmoralsbecomesofsecondaryornoimportance,asallmathematicaldistinctionsvanishinpresenceoftheinfinite.ButIdosaythatthatdistinctionisofthefirstimportancefortheobjectwhichweareheretoconsider—arightstudyandmasteryofthelawasabusinesswithwellunderstoodlimits,abodyofdogmaenclosedwithindefinitelines.Ihavejustshownthepracticalreasonforsayingso.Ifyouwanttoknowthelawandnothingelse,youmustlookatitasabadman,whocaresonlyforthematerialconsequenceswhichsuchknowledgeenableshimtopredict,notasagoodone，whofindshisreasonsforconduct,whetherinsidethelaworoutsideofit,inthevaguersanctionsofconscienee.Thetheoreticalimportanceofthedistinotionisnoless,ifyouwouldreasononyoursubjectaright.Thelawisfullofphraseologydrawnfrommorals,andbythemereforceoflanguagecontinuallyinvitesustopassfromonedomaintotheotherwithoutperceivingit,aswearesuretodounlesswehavetheboundaryconstantlybeforeourminds・Thelawtalksaboutrights,andduties,andmalice,andintent,andnegligenee,andsoforth,andnothingiseasier,or5Imaysay,morecommoninlegalreasoning,thantotakethesewordsintheirmoral，sense5atsomestateoftheargumentandsotodropintofallacy.Forinstance,whenwespeakoftherightsofmaninamoralsense,wemeantomarkthelimitsofinterfereneewithindividualfreedomwhichwethinkareprescribedbyconscienee,orbyourideal,howeverreached.Yetitiscertainthatmanylawshavebeenenforcedinthepast,anditislikelythatsomeareenforcednow,whicharecondemnedbythemostenlightenedopinionofthetime,orwhichatalleventspassthelimitofinterferenee,asmanyconscienceswoulddrawit.Manifestly,therefore,nothingbutconfusionofthoughtcanresultfromassumingthattherightsofmaninamoralsenseareequallyrightsinthesenseoftheConstitutionandthelaw.Nodoubtsimpleandextremecasescanbeputofimaginablelawswhichthestatute-makingpowerwouldnotdaretoenact,evenintheabsenceofwrittenconstitutionalprohibitions,becausethecommunitywouldriseinrebellionandfight;andthisgivessomeplausibilitytothepropositionthatthelaw,ifnotapartofmorality,islimitedbyit.Butthislimitofpowerisnotcoextensivewithanysystemofmorals.Forthemostpartitfallsfarwithinthelinesofanysuchsystem,andinsomecasesmayextendbeyondthem,forreasonsdrawnfromthehabitsofaparticularpeopleataparticulartime.IonceheardthelateProfessorAgassizsaythataGermanpopulationwouldriseifyouaddedtwocentstothepriceofaglassofbeer.Astatuteinsuchacasewouldbeemptywords,notbecauseitwaswrong,butbecauseitcouldnotbeenforeed・Noonewilldenythatwrongstatutescanbeandareenforeed,andwewouldnotallagreeastowhichwerethewrongones.TheconfusionwithwhichIamdealingbesetsconfessedlylegalconceptions.Takethefundamentalquestion,Whatconstitutesthelaw?YouwillfindsometextwriterstellingyouthatitissomethingdifferentfromwhatisdecidedbythecourtsofMassachusettsorEngland,thatitisasystemofreason,thatitisadeductionfromprinciplesofethicsoradmittedaxiomsorwhatnot,whichmayormaynotcoincidewiththedecisions.Butifwetaketheviewofourfriendthebadmanweshallfindthathedoesnotcaretwostrawsfortheaxiomsordeductions,butthathedoeswanttoknowwhattheMassachusettsorEnglishcourtsarelikelytodoinfact.Iammuchofthismind.Thepropheciesofwhatthecourtswilldoinfact,andnothingmorepretentious,arewhatImeanbythelaw・Takeagainanotionwhichaspopularlyunderstoodisthewidestconceptionwhichthelawcontains—thenotionoflegalduty,towhichalreadyIhavereferred.Wefillthewordwithallthecontentwhichwedrawfrommorals.Butwhatdoesitmeantoabadman?Mainly,andinthefirstplace,aprophecythatifhedoescertainthingshewillbesubjectedtodisagreeableconsequencesbywayofimprisonmentorcompulsorypaymentofmoney.Butfromhispointofview,whatisthediffereneebetweenbeingfinedandtaxedacertainsumfordoingacertainthing?Thathispointofviewisthetestoflegalprinciplesisprovenbythemanydiscussionswhichhaveariseninthecourtsontheveryquestionwhetheragivenstatutoryliabilityisapenaltyoratax.Ontheanswertothisquestiondependsthedecisionwhetherconductislegallywrongorright,andalsowhetheramanisundercompulsionorfree.Leavingthecriminallawononeside,whatisthediffereneebetweentheliabilityunderthemillactsorstatutesauthorizingatakingbyeminentdomainandtheliabilityforwhatwecallawrongfulconversionofpropertywhererestorationisoutofthequestion.Inbothcasesthepartytakinganotherman'spropertyhastopayitsfairvalueasassessedbyajury,andnomore・Whatsignificanceisthereincallingonetakingrightandanotherwrongfromthepointofviewofthelaw?Itdoesnotmatter,sofarasthegivenconsequence,thecompulsorypayment,isconcerned,whethertheacttowhichitisattachedisdescribedintermsofpraiseorintermsofblame,orwhetherthelawpurportstoprohibititortoallowit.Ifitmattersatall,stillspeakingfromthebadman'spointofview,itmustbebecauseinonecaseandnotintheothersomefurtherdisadvantages,oratleastsomefurtherconsequences,area社achedtotheactbylaw・TheonlyotherdisadvantagesthusattachedtoitwhichIeverhavebeenabletothinkofaretobefoundintwosomewhatinsignificantlegaldoctrines,bothofwhichmightbeabolishedwithoutmuchdisturbance・Oneis,thatacontracttodoaprohibitedactisunlawful,andtheother,that,ifoneoftwoormorejointwrongdoershastopayallthedamages,hecannotrecovercontributionfromhisfellows.AndthatIbelieveisall.Youseehowthevaguecircumfereneeofthenotionofdutyshrinksandatthesametimegrowsmoreprecisewhenwewashitwithcynicalacidandexpeleverythingexcepttheobjectofourstudy,theoperationsofthelaw.Nowhereistheconfusionbetweenlegalandmoralideasmoremanifestthaninthelawofcontract.Amongotherthings,hereagaintheso-calledprimaryrightsanddutiesareinvestedwithamysticsignificancebeyondwhatcanbeassignedandexplained.Thedutytokeepacontractatcommonlawmeansapredictionthatyoumustpaydamagesifyoudonotkeepit—andnothingelse.Ifyoucommitatort,youareliabletopayacompensatorysum.Ifyoucommitacontract,youareliabletopayacompensatorysumunlessthepromisedeventcomestopass,andthatisallthedifference.Butsuchamodeoflookingatthematterstinksinthenostrilsofthosewhothinkitadvantageoustogetasmuchethicsintothelawastheycan.ItwasgoodenoughforLordCoke,however,andhere,asinmanyotherscases,Iamcontenttoabidewithhim.InBromagev.Genning5aprohibitionwassoughtintheKings*BenchagainstasuitinthemarchesofWalesforthespecificperformanceofacovenanttograntalease,andCokesaidthatitwouldsubverttheintentionofthecovenantor,sinceheintendsittobeathiselectioneithertolosethedamagesortomakethelease.SergeantHarrafortheplaintiffconfessedthathemovedthematteragainsthisconscience,andaprohibitionwasgranted.Thisgoesfurtherthanweshouldgonow,butitshowswhatIventuretosayhasbeenthecommonlawpointofviewfromthebeginning5althoughMr.Harriman,inhisveryablelittlebookuponContractshasbeenmisled,asIhumblythink,toadifferentconclusion.Ihavespokenonlyofthecommonlaw，becausetherearesomecasesinwhichalogicaljustificationcanbefoundforspeakingofcivilliabilitiesasimposingdutiesinanintelligiblesense.Thesearetherelativelyfewinwhichequitywillgrantaninjunction,andwillenforceitbyputtingthedefendantinprisonorotherwisepunishinghimunlesshecomplieswiththeorderofthecourt.ButIhardlythinkitadvisabletoshapegeneraltheoryfromtheexception,andIthinkitwouldbebettertoceasetroublingourselvesaboutprimaryrightsandsanctionsaltogether,thantodescribeourpropheciesconcerningtheliabilitiescommonlyimposedbythelawinthoseinappropriateterms.Imentioned,asotherexamplesoftheusebythelawofwordsdrawnfrommorals,malice,intent,andnegligenee.Itisenoughtotakemaliceasitisusedinthelawofcivilliabilityforwrongswhatwelawyerscallthelawoftortstoshowthatitmeanssomethingdifferentinlawfromwhatitmeansinmorals,andalsotoshowhowthedifferencehasbeenobscuredbygivingtoprincipleswhichhavelittleornothingtodowitheachotherthesamename・ThreehimdredyearsagoaparsonpreachedasermonandtoldastoryoutofFox'sBookofMartyrsofamanwhohadassistedatthetortureofoneofthesaints,andafterwarddied,sufferingcompensatoryinwardtorment.IthappenedthatFoxwaswrong.Themanwasaliveandchaneedtohearthesermon,andthereuponhesuedtheparson.ChiefJusticeWrayinstructedthejurythatthedefendantwasnotliable,becausethestorywastoldinnocently,withoutmalice.Hetookmaliceinthemoralsense3asimportingamalevolentmotive.Butnowadaysnoonedoubtsthatamanmaybeliable,withoutanymalevolentmotiveatall,forfalsestatementsmanifestlycalculatedtoinflicttemporaldamage.Instatingthecaseinpleading,westillshouldcallthedefendant'sconductmalicious;but,inmyopinionatleast,thewordmeansnothingaboutmotives,orevenaboutthedefendant'sattitudetowardthefuture,butonlysignifiesthatthetendencyofhisconductunderknowncircumstanceswasveryplainlytocausetheplaintifftemporalharm・Inthelawofcontracttheuseofmoralphraseologyledtoequalconfusion,asIhaveshowninpartalready,butonlyinpa