The transformation of trusts as a legal category, 1800–1914

Law and History Review

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 1987, Pages 303-350

  Alexander, Gregory S ^a  

^a Cornell University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84959587315     PISSN: 07382480     EISSN: 19399022     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/743890     Document Type: Article

References (116)

1. George Costigan, ' The Classification of Trusts as Express, Resulting, and Constructive’, 27 Harvard Law Review 437 (1914).
2. Grey, supra note 5 at 47. The following discussion draws on Grey’s illuminating remarks on Classical legal ordering, ibid. at 47–50.
3. Frederick Pollock, ‘Divisions of Law’, 8 Harvard Law Review 187, 197 (1894).
4. Kennedy, ‘The Structure of Blackstone’s Commentaries’, 28 Buffalo Law Review 209 (1979).
5. Kennedy, Rise and Fall of Classical Legal Thought’, supra note 5 at part III: 52, 55.
6. C.C. Langdell, Summary of Equity Pleading (Cambridge, Mass., 2d ed., 1883) 27–42.
7. Frederick Pollock, ' The Transformation of Equity’, in Essays in Legal History (P. Vinogradoff, ed., London, 1913) 286.
8. Thurman Arnold, ‘The Restatement of the Law of Trusts’, 31 Columbia Law Review 800, 822–23 (1931).
9. Pollock, supra note 14, at 192 (‘A‖ division accepted by almost all systematic writers is that of public and private law.’) For contemporary views on this distinction, see the recent symposium in 130 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1289 (1982).
10. Holmes, ' The Theory of Tort’, 7 American Law Review 652 (1873).
11. Melville M. Bigelow, Elements of the Law of Torts for the Use of Students (Boston, 1878).
12. Samuel Williston, ' Mutual Assent in the Formation of Contracts’, 14 Illinois Law Review 85, 85–87 (1920).
13. Morris Cohen, ' Property and Sovereignty’, 13 Cornell Law Review 8 (1927).
14. Robert Hale, ‘Coercion and Distribution in a Supposedly Non-Coercive State’ 38 American Political Science Quarterly (1923) 470.
15. ‘Codes, and the Arrangement of the Law’, 5 American Law Review 1 (1870);.
16. ‘Misunderstandings of the Civil Law’, 6 American Law Review 37 (1871);.
17. ‘The Arrangement of the Law—Privity’, 7 American Law Review 46 (1872).
18. John Chipman Gray, ‘Some Definitions and Questions in Jurisprudence’, 6 Harvard Law Review 21, 22 (1892).
19. Mark deWolfe Howe, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, vol. II: The Proving Years, 1870–1882 (Cambridge, Mass., 1963) 66–85.
20. Oliver Wendell Holmes, ‘Codes, And the Arrangement of the Law’, 5 American Law Review 1, 3 (1870).
21. John H. Wigmore, ‘The Tripartite Division of Torts’, 8 Harvard Law Review 200 (1894) (reacting to Holmes’s article, ‘Privilege, Malice, and Intent’, ibid. at 1).
22. William A. Keener, Treatise on the Law of Quasi-Contract (New York, 1893) 16–25.
23. David Sugarman, ‘Legal Theory, the Common Law Mind and the Making of the Textbook Tradition’, in William Twining, ed., Legal Theory and the Common Law (Oxford, 1986) 26.
24. Thomas Erskine Holland, Essays upon the Form of the Law (London, 1870);.
25. Thomas Erskine Holland, The Elements of Jurisprudence (London, 2d ed., 1882).
26. John Salmond, Jurisprudence, or the Theory of the Law (London, 1902).
27. William Markby, Elements of Law, Considered with Reference to Principles of General Jurisprudence (London, 2d ed., 1874).
28. Frederick Pollock, ‘General Introduction’, Encyclopedia of the Laws of England, 12 vols. (London, 1897) i; 7 n.2.
29. L. A. Burleigh, ‘Notes on Property taught by Prof. J. C. Gray, 1891-92’ (Harvard Law School, Manuscripts Collection) 5.
30. Kennedy, ‘The Rise and Fall of Classical Legal Thought’, supra note 5 at iv, 31–35.
31. Oliver W. Holmes, ‘Introduction to the General Survey’, in Collected Legal Papers (New York, 1920) 298–301.
32. T. E. Holland by Holmes in his unsigned review of Holland’s ‘Essays upon the Forms of Law’ 5 American Law Review 114 (1870).
33. Mark de Wolfe Howe, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, vol. 2: The Proving Years, 1870–1882 (Cambridge, Mass., 1963) 62–68.
34. Lochner V. New York, 198 U.S. 45, 76 (1905) (‘
35. Grey, supra note 5 at 8–9, n.27,.
36. Ibid. at 65–66.
37. James DeWitt Andrews, ‘Classification and Restatement of the Law’, 14 Illinois Law Review 465, 622 (1920).
38. Laura Kalman, Legal Realism at Yale, 1927–1960 (Chapel Hill, 1986) passim.
39. Thomas G. Shearman & Amasa Redfleld, A Treatise on the Law of Negligence (New York, 1869) (chapters arranged topically include ‘Bridges’, ‘Canals’, ‘Fences’, ‘Highways’, ‘Railroad Fences’, and ‘Telegraphs’).
40. Holmes, unsigned review of the second edition of this work appears in 5 American Law Review 343 (1871).
41. Holmes, unsigned review of The Code of Iowa in 7 American Law Review 318 (1873).
42. ‘The Arrangement of the Law—Privity’, 7 American Law Review 46, 47 note (1872).
43. Raymond Geuss, The Idea of a Critical Legal Theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt School (Cambridge, 1981) 9–11.
44. Richard Rorty, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature 15–127.
45. Patrick S. Atiyah, The Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract (Oxford, 1979) 134.
46. Lloyd Bonfield, Marriage Settlements, 1601–1740; The Adoption of the Strict Settlement (Cambridge, 1983) 24–35.
47. George Haskins, ‘Extending the Grasp of the Dead Hand: Reflections on the Origin of the Rule Against Perpetuities’, 126 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 19, 30–31 (1977).
48. John Habakkuk’s now–classic paper, ‘English Landownership, 1680–1740’, 10 Economic Historical Review I (1940).
49. G. R. Rubin and D. Sugarman, eds., Law, Economy, and Society: Essays in the History of English Law, 1750–1914 (Abindon, 1984)
50. Lloyd Bonfield (see Bonfield, supra note 47). See also Lawrence Stone, The Family, Sex and Marriage in England 1500–1800 (London, 1977).
51. A. W. B. Simpson, An Introduction to the History of the Land Law (Oxford, 1961) 214–15.
52. William Holdsworth, The History of English Law, 16 vols. (London, 1927) v: 309–15
53. Norma Basch, In the Eyes of the Law: Women, Marriage, and Property in Nineteenth-Century New York (Ithaca, 1982) 70–112
54. Marylynn Salmon, ‘The Legal Status of Women in Early America: A Reappraisal’, Law and History Review 1 (1983) 129, 146–51.
55. John Chipman Gray, Restraints on the Alienation of Property (Boston, 2d ed., 1895) 138–40.
56. John Chipman Gray, Restraints on the Alienation of Property (Boston, 2d ed., 1895) 139.
57. Jackson v. Hobhouse, 2 Mer. 483, 488 (1817). The early English cases are discussed.
58. Walter G. Hart, ‘The origin of the Restraint upon Anticipation’, 40 Law Quarterly Review 221 (1924).
59. P. S. Atiyah, supra note 51 at 172–77
60. John P. Dawson, ‘Economic Duress—An Essay in Perspective’, 45 Michigan Law Review 253, 267–68 (1947).
61. Myres McDougal and David Haber, Property, Wealth, Land: Allocation, Planning, and Development (Charlottesville, 1948) 159–62.
62. Grey, supra note 5 at 6–10.
63. Jaro Mayda (St. Paul, Minn., 2d ed., 1954).
64. Geza Kiss, ‘Equity and Law: Judicial Freedom of Discretion’, in Science of Legal Method: Selected Essays (Boston, 1917) 146–58.
65. G. R. Rubin and D. Sugarman, eds., Law, Economy and Society, 1750-1914: Essays in the History of English Law (Abindon, 1984) 124, 152.
66. Lord Pawlet’s Case, 2 Ventris 366 (1685).
67. Lawrence Friedman, ‘The Dynastic Trust’, 73 Yale Law Journal 547 (1964).
68. P. S. Atiyah, supra note 51 at 362–69.
69. Austin Wakeman Scott, The Law of Trusts, 6 vols. (Boston, 3d ed., 1967) i: 236-37;.
70. Harlan F. Stone, ‘The Nature of the Rights of the Cestui Que Trust’, 17 Columbia Law Review 467, 474 (1917);.
71. American Law Review 115, 115–16 (1870).
72. Roscoe Pound, ‘Consideration in Equity’, 13 Illinois Law Review 435, 678 (1919).
73. Richard V. Wellman, Lawrence W. Waggoner and Olin L. Browder, Jr., Palmer's Trusts and Succession (Mineola, N.Y., 4th ed., 1983) 471.
74. Osmere V. Sheafe, Carth. 307, 90 Eng. Rep. 78 (1694).
75. William Holdsworth, A History of English Law, 16 vols. (London, 1966) xvi: 121.
76. C. H. S. Fifoot, Lord Mansfield (Oxford, 1963) 178.].
77. Craker v. Parrett, 2 Freeman 18, 2 Chan. Cas. 228 (1677);.
78. Gibson v. Kenyon, 1 Vernon 66 (1682);.
79. D. E. C. Yale, Lord Nottingham's Chancery Cases, vol. 2, Case No. 770, 79 Selden Soc. 587 (London, 1961).
80. James Barr Ames, ‘The Failure of the Tilden Trust’, 5 Harvard Law Review 389, 395 (1892).
81. J. C. Gray, The Rule against Perpetuities (Boston, 3d ed., 1915) 909a.
82. J. C. Gray, ‘Gifts for a Non-Charitable Purpose’, 15 Harvard Law Review 509, 513, 514 (1902).
83. Geoffrey Gilbert, The Law of Uses and TrustsCollected and Digested in a Proper Order from the Reportsof Adjudged Cases, in the Courts of Law and Equity and Other Books of Authority Together with a Treatise of Dower (London, 1st ed., 1734); William Cruise, An Essay on Uses (London, 1st ed., 1795); Francis W. Sanders, An Essay on Usesand Trusts and on the Nature and Operation of Conveyances at Common Law, and of
84. William Cruise, An Essay on Uses (London, 1st ed., 1795); Francis W. Sanders, An Essay on Usesand Trusts and on the Nature and Operation of Conveyances at Common Law
85. Francis W. Sanders, An Essay on Usesand Trusts and on the Nature and Operation of Conveyances at Common Law, and of Those Which Derive Their Effect from the Statute of Uses, 2 vols. (London, 4th ed., 1824).
86. Thomas Lewin, A Practical Treatise on the Law of Trusts and Trustees (London, 1st ed., 1837);.
87. James Hill, A Practical Treatise on the Law Relating to Trustees, Their Powers, Duties, Privileges, and Liabilities (London, 1st ed., 1845);.
88. A. Underhill, A Concise Manual of the Law Relating to Private Trusts and Trustees (London, 1st ed., 1878);.
89. H. Godefroi, A Digest of the Principles of the Law of Trusts and Trustees (London, 1st ed., 1879).
90. Austin W. Scott, ‘Fifty Years of Trusts’, 50 Harvard Law Review 60 (1936).
91. James Barr Ames, A Selection of Cases on the Law of Trusts (Cambridge, Mass., 1st ed., 1882).
92. Laura Kalman, Legal Realism at Yale, 1927-1960 (Chapel Hill, 1986) 64.
93. Grey, supra note 5 at 1, 8–10, 47–50.
94. Grey, supra note 5 at 1, 16–32.
95. C. C. Langdell, Summary of the Law of Contracts (Boston, 2d ed., 1880) viii-ix.
96. Holmes, ‘Codes, and the Arrangement of the Law’, 5 American Law Review 1, reprinted in 44 Harvard Law Review 725 (1931).
97. O. W. Holmes, The Common Law (M. Howe, ed., Cambridge, Mass., 1963; 1st ed. 1881) 104.
98. O. W. Holmes Collected Legal Papers (New York, 1920) 195–97.
99. Thomas Lewin, A Practical Treatise on the Law of Trusts and Trustees (London, 1837) 21–22.
100. Perry, supra note 125 at 11, 112–23, 124–65, 166–230.
101. John Norton Pomeroy, A Treatise on Equity Jurisprudence, 3 vols. (San Francisco, 1886).
102. F. W. Maitland, Equity and the Forms of Action (A. H. Chaytor and W. J. Whittaker, eds., Cambridge, 1932)
103. ‘A Plea for a Modern Definition and Classification of Real Property’, 12 Yale Law Journal 425 (1903)
104. Albert Kokourek, ‘In Memoriam—George Purcell Costigan’, 29 Illinois Law Review 769, 771 (1935).
105. Lewin, supra note 136 at 168–224.
106. Maitland, supra note 143 at 75–76.
107. Costigan, supra note 144 at 462.
108. Morton Horwitz, ‘Be Review’, 42 University of Chicago Law Review 787, 789 (1975).
109. Duncan Kennedy’s unpublished work, 1 Rise and Fall of Classical Legal Thought, 1850–1940 (1975), especially chapters and IV.
110. Gregory S. Alexander, supra note 88, at 1189, 1209, 1227.
111. Costigan, The Classification of Trusts, supra note 144 at 449–50 (footnote omitted).
112. Costigan, The Classification of Trusts, supra note 144 at 452–53.
113. Costigan, ‘Trusts Based on Oral Promises’, supra note 158 at 437–38.
114. Costigan, The Classification of Trusts, supra note 144 at 463.
115. J. Bowman, Intimations of Ideological Change in the History of Cy Pres (unpublished ms., 1979).
116. Stanley N. Katz, Barry Sullivan and C. Paul Beach, ‘Legal Change and Legal Autonomy: Charitable Trusts in New York, 1777-1893’, Law and History Review 3 (1985) 51.