Women -- Employment -- United States; Women -- Social and moral questions
The next court case was that of Mrs. Belva Ann Lockwood, of Washington,
D. C., who graduated from the Law School of the National University, and
was admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the District, in
1873. The same year a motion was made for her admission to the bar of
the U. S. Court of Claims. This Court refused to act upon the motion,
“for want of jurisdiction.” The opinion concludes in these words: “The
position which this Court assumes is that under the Constitution and
Laws of the United States a court is without power to grant such an
application, and that a woman is without legal capacity to take the
office of attorney.” (Court of Claims Reports, vol. ix. p. 346.)
At the October term, 1876, of the Supreme Court of the United States,
Mrs. Lockwood applied for admission as practitioner of that court. Her
application was denied. The decision has not been officially reported,
but, upon the record of the Court, it is thus stated: “Upon the
presentation of this application the Chief Justice said that, notice of
this application having been previously brought to his attention, he had
been instructed by the Court to announce the following decision upon it:
By the uniform practice of the Court from its organization to the
present time, and by the fair construction of its rules, none but men
are admitted to practice before it as attorneys and counselors. This is
in accordance with immemorial usage in England, and the law and practice
in all the States, until within a recent period; and the Court does not
feel called upon to make a change until such a change is required by
statute or a more extended practice in the highest courts of the
States.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account