Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-rnpqb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-27T15:14:26.090Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Pierson v. Post: A Great Debate, James Kent, and the Project of Building a Learned Law for New York State

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Abstract

Pierson v. Post (1805) has long puzzled legal teachers and scholars. This article argues that the appellate report was the product of the intellectual interests (and schooling) of the lawyers and judges involved in the case. They converted a minor dispute about a fox into a major argument in order to argue from Roman and other civil law sources on how to establish possession in wild animals, effectively crafting an opportunity to create new law for New York State. This article explores the possibility that the mastermind behind this case was the chief justice of the court at the time, James Kent. The question of Kent's involvement in 1805 remains elusive. However, the article uses annotations he made on his copy of the case and discussion of Pierson v. Post in his famous Commentaries to demonstrate the nature of his later interest and to explore the project of building a learned law for New York State.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2009 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Alexander, Gregory S. 1997. Commodity and Propriety: Competing Visions of Property in American Thought, 17761970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Baker, G. Blaine. 1985. The Juvenile Advocate Society, 1821 to 1826: Self‐Proclaimed Schoolroom for Upper Canada's Governing Class. Historical Papers—Canadian Historical Association 1985:74101.Google Scholar
Bell, D. G. 1988. Paths to the Law in the Maritimes, 1810–1825: The Bliss Brothers and their Circle. Nova Scotia History Review 8:639.Google Scholar
Berger, Bethany R. 2006. It's Not About the Fox: The Untold History of Pierson v. Post . Duke Law Journal 55:10891143.Google Scholar
Blackstone, William. 1766. The Rights of Things. Vol. 2, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Law of England. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/blackstone_bk2ch1.asp (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Boorstin, Daniel J. 1941. The Mysterious Science of the Law: An Essay on Blackstone's Commentaries, Showing how Blackstone, Employing Eighteenth‐Century Ideas of Science, Religion, History, Aesthetics, and Philosophy, Made of the Law of the Law at Once a Conservative and Mysterious Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Caines, George. 1806. New York Term Reports: Or Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of that State (1803–1805). Vol. 3. New York: Isaac Riley.Google Scholar
Caines, George. 1814. New‐York Term Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of that State, 2nd ed. Vol. 3. New York: Van Winkle and Wiley Printers.Google Scholar
Cairns, John W. 1984. Blackstone, an English Institutionist: Legal Literature and the Rise of the Nation State. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 4:318–60.Google Scholar
Carrington, Paul D. 1990. Teaching Law and Virtue at Transylvania University: The George Wythe Tradition in the Antebellum Years. Mercer Law Review 41:673–99.Google Scholar
Coquillette, Daniel R., ed. 1984. Justinian in Braintree: John Adams, Civilian Learning, and Legal Elitism, 1758–1775. In Law in Colonial Massachusetts, 1630–1800: A conference held 6 and 7 November 1981 by the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, 359418. Boston: Colonial Society of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
De Montmorency, J. E. 1913. Robert‐Joseph Pothier and French Law. Journal of the Society of Comparative Legislation 13:265–87.Google Scholar
Dictionary of American Biography [DAB]. 2008a. “Cadwallader David Colden.” Prepared by Richard B. Morris. Dictionary of American Biography Base Set. American Council of Learned Societies, 1928–1936. Reproduced in Biography Resource Center. Farmington Hills, MI: Thomson Gale. http://galenet.galegroup.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/servlet/BioRC (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Dictionary of American Biography [DAB]. 2008b. “James Kent.” Prepared by Frederick Charles Hicks. Dictionary of American Biography Base Set. American Council of Learned Societies, 1928–1936. Reproduced in Biography Resource Center. Farmington Hills, MI: Thomson Gale. http://galenet.galegroup.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/servlet/BioRC (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Dictionary of American Biography [DAB]. 2008c. “Henry Brockholst Livingston.” Prepared by Robert E. Cushman. Dictionary of American Biography Base Set. American Council of Learned Societies, 1928–1936. Reproduced in Biography Resource Center. Farmington Hills, MI: Thomson Gale. http://galenet.galegroup.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/servlet/BioRC (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Dictionary of American Biography [DAB]. 2008d. “Nathan Sanford.” Prepared by Edward Conrad Smith. Dictionary of American Biography Base Set. American Council of Learned Societies, 1928–1936. Reproduced in Biography Resource Center. Farmington Hills, MI: Thomson Gale. http://galenet.galegroup.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/servlet/BioRC (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Dictionary of American Biography [DAB]. 2008e. “Ambrose Spencer.” Prepared by Julian P. Boyd. Dictionary of American Biography Base Set. American Counsel of Learned Societies, 1928–1936. Reproduced in Biography Resource Center. Farmington Hills, MI: Thomson Gale. http://galenet.galegroup.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/servlet/BioRC (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Donahue, Charles Jr. 1986. Animalia Ferae Naturae: Rome, Bologna, Leyden, Oxford, and Queen's County, NY. In Studies in Roman Law: In Memory of A. Arthur Schiller, ed. Bagnall, Roger S. and Harris, William V., 3963. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Donahue, Charles Jr., Kauper, Thomas E., and Martin, Peter W. 1993. Occupancy, the Source of “Property”? Pierson v. Post . In Cases and Materials on Property: An Introduction to the Concept and the Institution, 3rd ed., ed. Donahue, Charles Jr., 27. St. Paul, MN: West.Google Scholar
Fernandez, Angela. Forthcoming. The Lost Record of Pierson v. Post, the Famous Fox Case. Law and History Review.Google Scholar
Fernandez, Angela. 2007. Spreading the Word: From the Litchfield Law School to the Harvard Case Method. JSD diss., Yale Law School, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
Folts, James D. 1991. Duely and Constantly Kept”: A History of the New York Supreme Court, 1691–1847 and an Inventory of Its Records (Albany, Utica, and Geneva Offices, 1797–1847). http://www.courts.state.ny.us/history/pdf/Library/Research/Duely_and_Constantly_Kept.pdf (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Friedman, Lawrence M. 2005. A History of American Law, rev. ed. New York: Touchstone.Google Scholar
Gentleman of the Bar [Samuel R. Brown]. 1813. The Justices' Directory, Or, Points on Certiorari: Being a Digest of the Cases Reported by Johnson & Caines. http://galenet.galegroup.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/servlet/MOML?af=RN&ae=F105002513&srchtp=a&ste=14 (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Halperin, Jean‐Louis. 2006. The French Civil Code. Trans. Tony Weir. New York: University College London Press.Google Scholar
Hamlin, Paul. 1970. Legal Education in Colonial New York. New York: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. 1956. Blackstone's Use of the Law of Nature. Butterworths South African Law Review 1956:169–74.Google Scholar
Hedges, H. P. 1895. Pierson vs. Post. Sag‐Harbor Express, October 24, 1.Google Scholar
Hoeflich, Michael H. 1992. Roman Law in American Legal Culture. Tulane Law Review 66:1723–43.Google Scholar
Hoeflich, Michael H. 2002. Translation and Reception of Foreign Law in the Antebellum United States. American Journal of Comparative Law 50:753–75.Google Scholar
Hoffman, David. 1846. A Course of Legal Study, Addressed to Students and the Profession Generally. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Thomas, Cowperthwait and Co. Repr., Buffalo, NY: William S. Hein, 1968.Google Scholar
Horton, John Theodore. 1939. James Kent: A Study in Conservatism, 1763–1847. New York: D. Appleton‐Century.Google Scholar
Hulsebosch, Daniel J. 2005. Constituting Empire: New York and the Transformation of Constitutionalism in the Atlantic World, 1664–1830. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Justinian. 1913. The Institutes of Justinian. Institutiones. Trans. John Baron Moyle. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Justinian. 1950. Digest 41, 1 & 2. Corpus Juris Civilis. Digesta. Trans. Francis De Zeleuta. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kelley, Donald R. 1979. Gaius Noster: Substructures of Western Social Thought. American Historical Review 84:619–48.Google Scholar
Kennett, Basil. 1703. An Introduction to Pufendorf. In Of the Laws of Nature and Nations: Eight Books. Trans. Basil Kennett, 1–27. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k95829z (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Kent, James. 1826. Commentaries on American Law. Vol 1. New York: O. Halsted. Repr., Buffalo, NY: William S. Hein, 1984.Google Scholar
Kent, James. 1827. Commentaries on American Law. Vol. 2. New York: O. Halsted. Repr., Buffalo, NY: William S. Hein, 1984.Google Scholar
Kent, James. 1872. Autobiographical Sketch of Chancellor Kent. Southern Law Review Old Series 1:381–91.Google Scholar
Kent, James. 1873. Commentaries on American Law. Vol. 2, 12th ed., ed. Holmes, O. W. Jr. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Kent, James. 1898. Memoires and Letters of James Kent, LL.D. Late Chancellor of the State of New York, Author of “Commentaries on American Law,” etc. by his great‐grandson William Kent of the New York Bar. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Kent, James. 1903. Kent's Introductory Lecture. Columbia Law Review 3:330–43.Google Scholar
Klein, Milton M. 1958. The Rise of the New York Bar: The Legal Career of William Livingston. William and Mary Quarterly 15:334–58.Google Scholar
Langbein, John H. 1993. Chancellor Kent and the History of Legal Literature. Columbia Law Review 93:547–94.Google Scholar
Lieberman, David. 1989. The Province of Legislation Determined: Legal Theory in Eighteenth Century Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lucas, Paul. 1963. Ex Parte Sir William Blackstone: “Plagiarist”: A Note on Blackstone and the Natural Law. American Journal of Legal History 7:142–58.Google Scholar
Macdonald, R. St. J. 1987. Maximilien Bibaud, 1823–1887: The Pioneer Teacher of International Law in Canada. Dalhousie Law Journal 11:721–43.Google Scholar
Marvin, J. G. 1847. Legal Bibliography Or a Thesaurus of American, English, Irish, and Scotch Law Books, Together with Some Continental Treatises, Interspersed with Critical Observations upon their Various Editions and Authority. Philadelphia: T. and J. W. Johnson, Law Booksellers. Repr., Buffalo, NY: Dennis and Co., 1953.Google Scholar
McKenna, Marian C. 1986. Tapping Reeve and the Litchfield Law School. Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana Publications.Google Scholar
McDowell, Andrea. 2007. Legal Fictions in Pierson v. Post . Michigan Law Review 105:735–77.Google Scholar
Morel, André, and LaMonde, Yvan. 2000. Bibaud, François‐Maximilien. Vol. 11. Dictionary of Canadian Biography Online. http://www.biographi.ca/EN/ShowBio.asp?BioId=39492&query=bibaud (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Nolan, Dennis R. 1976. Sir William Blackstone and the New American Republic: A Study of Intellectual Impact. New York University Law Review 51:731–68.Google Scholar
Parrish, Jenni. 1979. Law Books and Legal Publishing in America, 1760–1840. Law Library Journal 72:355452.Google Scholar
Pothier, Robert‐Joseph. 18211824. Oeuvres Complètes de Pothier. 26 vols, ed. Berville, Saint‐Albin. Paris: Thomine et Fortic. Bibliothèque nationale de France, Catalogue B‐N Opale #FRBNF31140148. http://catalogue.bnf.fr/servlet/notices?ID=90353104&idNoeud=1.4&NomAutorite=Oeuvres%2Bcompl%2526%2523232%253Btes%2Bde%2BPothier%252C%2Bnouvelle%2B%2526%2523233%253Bdition%2B%255Bpar%2BSaint‐Albin%2BBerville%255D&&host=catalogue (accessed December 21 2008).Google Scholar
Pothier, Robert‐Joseph. 1821. Traités du droit de domaine de propriété, de la possession, de la prescription qui resulte de la possession. Vol. 10, Oeuvres Complètes de Pothier, ed. Siffrein, M. Paris: Chez Chanson, Imprimeur‐Libraire. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k24205m (accessed December 21 2008).Google Scholar
Pothier, Robert‐Joseph. 1822. Coutume d'Orleans. Vol. 17, Oeuvres Complètes de Pothier, ed. Siffrein, M. Paris: Chez l'éditeur. http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k24212w (accessed December 21 2008).Google Scholar
Pufendorf, Samuel. 1749. Law of Nature and Nations: Or, a General System of the Most Important Principles of Morality, Jurisprudence, and Politics. In Eight Books. Written in Latin by the Baron Pufendorf, … Done into English by Basil Kennett, … To which is prefix'd, M. Barbeyrac's prefactory discourse, … Done into English by Mr. Carew, … To which are now added, all the large notes of M. Barbeyrac, translated from his fourth and last edition: together with large tables. London: Printed for J. and J. Bonwicke, R. Ware, J. and P. Knapton, S. Birt, T. Longman [and others.Google Scholar
Robinson, Ira E. 19141915. American Recognition of the Roman or Civil Law. Illinois Law Review 9:400–09.Google Scholar
Rogers, Christopher P. 1987. Continental Literature and the Development of the Common Law by the King's Bench: c. 1750–1800. In The Courts and the Development of Commercial Law, ed. Piergiovanni, Vito, 161–94. Berlin: Duncker and Humblot.Google Scholar
Roper, Donald M. 1972. The Elite of the New York Bar as Seen from the Bench: James Kent's Necrologies. New York Historical Society Quarterly 56:199237.Google Scholar
Roper, Donald M. 1980. The New York Supreme Court and Economic Development, 1798–1823. In Working Papers from the Regional Economic History Research Center; Law and Economic Development: Papers from the Fall 1979 Regional Economic History Conference, eds. Porter, Glenn and Mullligan, William H. Jr., 3(3):5889. Wilmington, DE: Greenville Google Scholar
Roper, Donald M. 2000. “Daniel D. Tompkins. American National Biography Online. Feb. 2000. American Council of Learned Societies. Oxford University Press. http://www/anb.org/articles/03/03‐00494.html (accessed December 21, 2008).Google Scholar
Simpson, A. W. B. 1981. The Rise and Fall of the Legal Treatise: Legal Principles and the Forms of Legal Literature. University of Chicago Law Review 48:632–79.Google Scholar
Simpson, A. W. B. 1995. The Timeless Principles of the Common Law: Keeble v. Hickeringill (1707). In Leading Cases in the Common Law, ed. Simpson, A. W. B., 4575. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Skemer, Don C. 1978. The Institutio legalis and Legal Education in New Jersey: 1783–1817. New Jersey History (Autumn‐Winter):123–34.Google Scholar
Sowerby, Emily Millicent. 1953. Philosophy. Vol. 2, Catalogue of Thomas Jefferson. Washington, DC: Library of Congress.Google Scholar
Tocqueville, Alexis de. 1990. Democracy in America. Vol. 1. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Watson, Alan. 1993. Chancellor Kent's Use of Foreign Law. In The Reception of Continental Ideas in the Common Law World, 1820–1920, ed. Reimann, Mathias, 4562. Berlin: Duncker and Humbolt.Google Scholar
Watson, Alan. 1996. Introduction to Law for Second‐Year Students? Journal of Legal Education 46:430–44.Google Scholar
Wenig, Mary Moers. 1990. The Marital Property Law of Connecticut: Past, Present and Future. Wisconsin Law Review 1990:807–79.Google Scholar

Cases

Bebee v. Bank of New York, 1 Johns. 529 (NY Ct. Err. 1806).Google Scholar
Brandt v. Ogden, 3 Cai. R. 6 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Cheviot v. Brooks, 1 Johns. 365 (NY Sup. Ct. 1806).Google Scholar
Codwife and Ludlow v. Hacker, Cole & Cas, Cai. R. 401 (NY Sup. Ct., 1804).Google Scholar
Colden v. Thurbur, 2 Johns. 424 (NY Sup. Ct. 1807).Google Scholar
Curtis v. Groat, 6 Johns. 168, 170 (N. Sup. Ct. 1810).Google Scholar
Delevan v. Baldwin, 3 Cai. R. 104 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Dennis v. Cummins, 3 Johns. 297 (NY Sup. St. 1803).Google Scholar
Dewitt v. Schoonmaker, 2 Johns. 243 (NY Sup. Ct. 1807).Google Scholar
Ferris v. Coles, 3 Cai.R. 207 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Frith v. Baker, 2 Johns. 327 (NY Sup. Ct. 1807).Google Scholar
Griswold v. Waddington, 16 Johns. 438 (NY 1818).Google Scholar
Hall v. Shultz & Shultz, 4 Johns. 240 (NY Sup. Ct. 1809).Google Scholar
Henshaw v. M. I. Co., 2 Cai. R. 274 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Hinckley v. Boardman, 3 Cai. R. 134 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Jackson v. Chase, 2 Johns. 84 (NY Sup. Ct. 1806).Google Scholar
Jackson v. Shepard, 2 Johns. 78 (NY Sup. Ct. 1806).Google Scholar
Jackson v. Vredenbergh, 1 Johns. 159 (NY Sup. Ct., 1806).Google Scholar
Keeler v. Adams, 3 Cai. R. 84 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Lawrence v. Sebor, 2 Cai. R. 203 (NY Sup. Ct. 1804).Google Scholar
Leavenworth v. Delafield, 1 Cai. R. 573 (NY Sup. Ct. 1804).Google Scholar
Ludlow v. Bowne and Eddy, 1 Johns. 1 (NY Sup. Ct. 1806).Google Scholar
Newkerk and others v. Newkerk and others, 2 Cai. R. 345 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Palmer v. Mulligan, 3 Cai. R. 307 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Peck v. The Trustees of Randall, 1 Johns. 165 (NY Sup. Ct. 1806).Google Scholar
Pelton v. Ward, 3 Cai. R. 73 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Penny and Scribner v. The NY Ins. Co., 3 Cai. R. 155 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
The People v. Barrett and Ward, 1 Johns. 66 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1806).Google Scholar
Pierson v. Post, 3 Cai. R. 175 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Post and La Rue v. Neafie, 3 Cai. R. 22 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Potter v. Lansing, 1 Johns. 215 (NY Sup. Ct. 1806).Google Scholar
Robert v. Garnie, 3 Cai. R. 14 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Robinson v. N.Y. Ins. Co., 2 Cai. R. 357 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Ruan v. Perry, 3 Cai. R. 120 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Sands v. Codwise, 2 Johns. 485 (NY Ct. Errors 1807).Google Scholar
Schoonmaker v. Trans., 2 Cai. R. 110 (NY Sup. Ct. 1804).Google Scholar
Schuyler v. Van Der Veer, 2 Cai. R. 235 (NY Sup. Ct. 1804).Google Scholar
Shadwick v. Phillips, 3 Cai. R. 129 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Smith and Delamater v. Richardson, 3 Cai. R. 219 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Tom v. Goodrich, 2 Johns. 213 (NY Sup. Ct. 1807).Google Scholar
The United Ins. Co. of NY v. Robinson and Hartshorne, 2 Cai. R. 280 (NY Sup. Ct. 1805).Google Scholar
Van Bramer v. Cooper, 2 Johns. 279 (NY Sup. Ct. 1807).Google Scholar
Vrooman v. Phelps, 2 Johns. 177 (NY Sup. Ct. 1807).Google Scholar
Ward v. Clark, 2 Johns. 10 (NY Sup. Ct. 1806).Google Scholar

Archival Documents

The Papers of James Kent, 1799–1808, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
[Letter A]. James Kent to Elizabeth Kent. May 7, 1805. Reel 2. Vol. 3.Google Scholar
[Letter B]. Elizabeth Kent to James Kent. May 11, 1805. Reel 2. Vol. 3.Google Scholar
[List of Books Read]. 1805. Reel 2. Vol. 3.Google Scholar
Kent Family Papers, Diaries and Notebooks, 1842–1843, Columbia University, New York, Butler Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Catalogue of his Library. Vol. 8.Google Scholar