From: Greg Burch (gregburch@gregburch.net)
Date: Sat Oct 05 2002 - 17:35:35 MDT
There are a number of assertions in this article I have problems with,
but I'll quickly offer two. The author seems to suggest that the legal
institution of the limited liability corporation arose as a result of
the late 19th century "trust busters" and their attack on the legal tool
of the trust. But the corporation in more or less its modern form
predates that by some time (although there continues to be fine-tuning
through the present day). In fact the institution of limited liability
legal vehicles for sheltering investment reaches back very, very far,
indeed. In one instance, the legal personification of the ship and the
phenomenon of "general average" in admiralty law, those roots reach back
to the 16th century at least, and probably earlier.
Second, I would say that the primitivist notion of the common law, and
the implied picture of the pristine (i.e. pre-Norman) jury as judge of
both law and fact is simplistic at best. Anglo-Saxon juries surely had
elders who were looked to on matters of customary law with greater
deference than others, and I'd say that presages the role of the judge
in the more mature form of the common law we know today. As someone who
often has to deal with educating people whose cultural background does
not include the Anglo-American common law system, I can tell you that
the distinctive features of the common law are still quite alive and
well within broad spheres of our legal system.
Greg Burch
Vice-President, Extropy Institute
http://www.gregburch.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:25 MST