1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Chapter 5: Reawakening

The Second World War

The continuing optimism for an early launch of a law faculty in British Columbia was soon to give way to more sober assessment. The sitzkrieg that had prevailed in Europe during the winter of 1939–1940 gave way to German attacks on Norway and Denmark (April 9), France, and the Low Countries (May 10). . . Within a few short months the European war had become desperate. Harry Logan recalled that "by July the Commonwealth stood alone to face the marshalled might of Hitler". The University of British Columbia joined the rest of Canada in translating itself to a war footing.

Not surprisingly, legal education again took second place to more pressing demands on the energy, resources, time, and personnel of the university. Still, the idea of developing some sort of programme of formal legal studies at the University of British Columbia did not die entirely. On May 5, 1940, a committee of the Vancouver Bar Association met with Professor Henry Angus to discuss the possibility of somehow bringing order to and expanding the law-related courses on the undergraduate curriculum. Angus recorded the discussion that ensued in a memorandum to President Klinck:

On May 5, I met with the Committee of the Vancouver Bar Ass’n on legal education (Messrs. MacDougall, Darling and Campbell). They recognized that it was unlikely that a Faculty of Law could be established at the U.B.C. during the war and wished to do something to improve legal education in the meantime.

Their suggestion was that some law courses might be included as B.A. and B. Com. options. My view was that this suggestion ran counter to the intentions of the Bar Ass’n in insisting on a B.A. or B. Com. degree as a prerequisite for legal training, inasmuch as it would cut down the amount of general education to make room for professional subjects. It might, however, be possible to make Commercial Law a B.A. as well as a B. Com. option, and to make Government 2 a B. Com. elective.

I suggested that it might be more constructive to make a start with one year of law, after the B.A. or B. Com. degree, to be followed by two years of office training under articles. The same result would follow if the present time (three years) under articles were retained but students given leave to take one year at the U.B.C.—just as they are often given leave to study for a year at Dalhousie or Osgoode. A year’s course (15 units) could no doubt be devised which would be accepted by Canadian Law Schools as the equivalent of one year towards their degrees. . . . The cost might not be high . . . .

I explained that I did not think that the U.B.C. would be ready to consider such a proposal unless it were recognized as a mere interim policy designed to lead to a full fledged law school.

As for immediate action, it was decided that the Committee should correspond with Canadian Law Schools and find out the sort of course which would be generally acceptable as the equivalent of one year elsewhere, and that the university should not be approached unless there was a definite course in mind, on the basis of which financial estimates could be made.

This meeting seems to have been more or less informally arranged with Henry Angus (either in his capacity as head of the department of economics, political science, and sociology or simply because he was a legally qualified member of the University of British Columbia faculty) rather than mandated by the board of governors, senate, or the president’s office. In any event, little seems to have come of the idea and there is little evidence of any follow-up in the university during the remainder of the Second World War.

Another fully qualified legal academic was added to the university staff in 1942. William J. Brockelbank joined the faculty as a "lecturer in government" during 1942–1943. Holding a bachelor of arts degree from Haverford College, a bachelor of laws from Harvard, and the Docteur en droit from Paris, he was seemingly very well qualified to work either on expanding law offerings in the undergraduate programmes of the university as the Vancouver Bar Association had suggested or to work with others on developing a faculty of law. More prosaically, it is also possible that he was simply taken on to fill a gap created by the departure in 1941 of Henry Angus to serve as special assistant to the under-secretary of state for external affairs. Whatever the original motivation, nothing came of it. Brockelbank served only one year on faculty. The war dragged on; limited human energies were put to other uses.

Breakthrough!

The story of the origins of a university faculty of law in British Columbia is in large part a story of interesting initiatives stymied by external events: government hostility to the university coupled with fiscal crisis at the law society in the 1920s; economic depression in the 1930s; and war-time disruption in the 1910s and 1940s. Ironically, it was outside developments that gave added impetus and indeed urgency to the final push that lead to the creation of the University of British Columbia Faculty of Law in 1945.

By 1944 the course of the Second World War had turned and the return of many thousand Canadian soldiers seeking a university education or professional career loomed on the horizon. Reginald Tupper, dean of the Vancouver Law School from 1938 to 1943, had worked hard as a legal educator and on various committees directed toward the creation of a university law faculty from the 1920s onward. Alfred Watts’s records that in 1944 Dean Tupper reminded an annual meeting of the law society of both past failures in their efforts to establish a university law faculty and the urgent need to take advantage of the opportunities presented by the end of the war, then in sight. In the last years of the 1930s, he recalled:

We had assurance from the University that so soon as the Domestic Science course was instituted we would be next . . . . Since . . . we have heard that there has been an attempt to start a school of Pharmacy . . . . If we have not a faculty it is doubtful if we will reap any benefits of the rehabilitation scheme being extended to all students who are coming back . . . quick action must be taken . . . I am going to move that you appoint a committee to conduct an investigation with the University for the establishment of a Faculty of Law and that the Benchers do take some action in regard to the establishment of such a faculty as they can do as soon as possible.

Tupper’s motion was duly made and seconded by Leon Ladner. Senator Wallace Farris again served as chair of a Benchers’ committee to work with the university toward this end.

The university had a new president by this time, N. A. M. MacKenzie having been appointed when Klinck retired on August 1, 1944. On November 18, 1944, less than a month after the formal ceremonies installing MacKenzie, Farris was again writing to a president of the University of British Columbia to advise that he chaired a law society committee (J. A. Campbell, A. W. R. MacDougall, Arthur Lord, and Sherwood Lett) which aimed to promote and assist in the establishment of a faculty of law. The circumstances, on this occasion, were favourable. With the approach of peace, the federal government had adopted a policy that Harry Logan described in his history of the University of British Columbia as "open-handed assistance in the education of discharged military personnel". The public mood was expansive and optimistic.

Confident that, because of their previous efforts, everything but funding was in place for the creation of a university law faculty, the law society committee approached the government of British Columbia with a request backed by arguments addressing public demand, economic growth, patriotism, and fidelity to those who had served their country in time of war. The general outline of arguments put in support of government funding for a university law faculty are succinctly captured in a night letter sent to the premier by Sherwood Lett on January 11, 1945:

Hon. John Hart, Parliament Buildings, Victoria:
Regret inability to be present with Senator Farris President MacKenzie at interview tomorrow to endorse submission concerning law faculty STOP I understand initial cost would not be large and there is undoubtedly public demand for properly trained lawyers and adequate legal education STOP This demand will certainly increase with province’s industrial and commercial expansion STOP Suggest time is overdue when in the public interest British Columbia should provide its own legal education and if instituted now returned men can benefit STOP Respectfully recommend your favourable consideration and earliest possible action Sherwood Lett

Although some of the members of the law society delegation were heartened by their meeting with the premier, they were soon disappointed.

A June 21, 1945 letter from Senator Farris to President MacKenzie remarked on the fact that the government’s estimates indicated no likelihood that a law school could be developed in the near future. The disappointment was tangible. Farris noted that:

For five years, ending in 1938, I was Treasurer of the Law Society and at that time worked very hard to secure a Law School. Although we had the active support of President Klinck, nothing was accomplished. After this year’s budget I concluded that we were still no farther ahead.

British Columbia lawyers were not in a mood to take "No" for an answer, however. Farris informed the president that the officers of the law society and also the Vancouver Bar Association "intend to keep the question alive, and to continue the demand for a Law Faculty at the University". Farris reported that he had in fact "taken the matter up with Premier Hart" earlier that day. His pitch to the premier was simple and straightforward: there was a public need for a law school; accommodation presented insufficient difficulties to justify delay; and the capital expenditure necessary to create a law faculty was small. Obligation to returning soldiers was the final, irresistible argument put to the premier. On this point Farris simply noted that "[m]any of the boys are now returning from overseas and an urgent necessity exists". Incredibly, he indicated his assumption that "if provision were made at this time for a Dean and one or two instructors" this would "enable a beginning to be made this fall". The date on this letter, recall, was at the end of June!

Four days later, on June 25, 1945, the board of governors authorized MacKenzie to meet with Farris about a law faculty "with a view to co-operating in any way possible, but without any financial commitment on the part of the University". MacKenzie followed up and on July 7, 1945, wrote to the premier himself arguing from the need for returning service men and women to train for the legal profession: "We owe it to them." He told Premier Hart that "the University in co-operation with the Law Society and members of the legal profession should organize this year a law course for returned service personnel and such other of our young men and women as may desire to take it".

The premier recognized the irresistible force of a well-organized campaign when he saw it and the government gave way. On July 20, 1945, the premier wrote to offer $10,000 of public funds toward establishing university legal education in the province. From this point on, things moved smoothly and with astonishing speed. On July 30, the board of governors received the premier’s letter and formally gave their blessing to the immediate creation of a law faculty. President MacKenzie reported this meeting in a letter to Dean Daniel Buchanan:

The Board of Governors at the meeting on July 30th, received a letter from the Honourable John Hart, Premier, under date of July 20th, stating that the Government had approved the request for a grant of $10,000.00 for the establishment of a Faculty of Law in the immediate future so that the University, in co-operation with the Law Society, might provide this training for ex-service personnel who plan to enter the legal profession.
The following resolution was passed by the Board,—
That the Board of Governors go on record as approving, subject to the agreement of Senate, the establishment of a Faculty of Law at the University of British Columbia for the Session 1945–46, and that a letter of appreciation be sent to the Premier.

The university president had anticipated formal approval for the programme and seems to have begun his search for a dean of the new faculty immediately upon receipt of the premier’s letter. "Dean search" does not entirely capture the sense of what happened. MacKenzie seemed determined to lure Professor George Curtis away from his chair at the Dalhousie Law School and there is no evidence that other candidates were seriously sought out or even considered. The first approach to Professor Curtis was courteous, tactful, and indirect: a letter enquired whether he knew of any suitable candidates for the position. That letter did not arrive until after it was apparent that a more direct approach was needed. Five days after the letter was mailed, the university was forced to rapidly accelerate the process. R. A. MacKay sent a confidential cable to President MacKenzie reporting that Curtis was that night on a train to Edmonton to discuss a position at the Alberta Law School. MacKenzie moved quickly in response.

Dean Curtis recalled the sequence of events that took him to British Columbia during a 1980 interview with Murray Fraser:

Dr. Curtis: I had received a letter from the President of the University of Alberta who explained that their law school had more or less stood down for a time. Weir, the Dean, had died in the middle of the war. MacIntyre had carried on as acting dean for a year or two and then had returned to Sackville, New Brunswick, to practice with his father in the old firm. They were in mind, as the war was ending, to re-establish the Alberta Law School and they were looking for someone to take it on.
. . .
. . . and so I replied, thanked them very much but said that I was very well situated at Dalhousie. I was willing to think about it. They suggested that I come out. I said I would only come on the clear understanding that there was no commitment on my part, that I just wasn’t in any position, I wasn’t looking for anything, I was happy at Dalhousie, etc. They wrote back and said that was completely without prejudice, that I could come and just have a look at it and equally on their part, they wanted to look at me, etc. So off to Alberta. . . . So we had many discussions for two days and I went back to my hotel. I think I can say now that I wasn’t too happy with the set-up at the University. . . . I wasn’t too impressed with, first of all the arrangements that they had there. . . . I couldn’t get any clear idea of what was planned. . . . In any event, I was pretty negative in my mind. I hadn’t made up my mind but it wasn’t too favourable.
I arrived back at the hotel and the clerk rushed up to me and said, "Oh, I am so glad to see you. There’s a letter arrived here that actually arrived yesterday. And there was a Colonel of the United States Air Force of the same name as you and it was delivered to him. He’s gone now but he’s left a note of apology because he opened the letter and then saw it wasn’t for him." This was a letter from N. A. M. MacKenzie, the President of U.B.C., saying that they had decided to set up a law school.
. . .
Dean Fraser: The letter had gone from Vancouver to Halifax. . .
Dr. Curtis: From Vancouver to Halifax, from Halifax to Lunenburg County where my wife was. We had a little cottage rented down there at Lower La Have. She rushed in and put it in the post and sent it to me at Edmonton.

Curtis phoned MacKenzie the next morning and interviews were immediately arranged. The expected round of discussions with senior university officials and leaders of the Vancouver legal profession followed. A crucially important luncheon took place on August 2, at which George Curtis met with Senator Wallace Farris, Sherwood Lett, J. A. Campbell, Dal Grauer, Denis Murphy, Dean Buchanan, Dean Finlayson, Dr. Gordon Shrum, and R. Benson). The university officials and Vancouver lawyers were impressed by Curtis and he with them. A half-century later the retired Dean Curtis recalled:

It was a very impressive committee. Now, what was even more impressive to me as we sat down to lunch to discuss the matter was the answer that I got from them. I said "Well what sort of a law school do you want?" They said, "We want a law school like Dalhousie." Now that in the language of that time, meant a law school that was not rule-bound, a law school in accordance with the atmosphere, that Weldon the first Dean had created, would have a open mind towards the law. It would include International Law as one of its subjects, for instance. Constitutional Law taught, to use Holmes’ phrase in the "grand manner". That was the aspiration, and that was interesting because also it was a University Law School, and of course, the great contest you could see coming up in Canada was between . . . University law school as against a professionally controlled and run law school, which may well be much more inclined to be rule-bound, not likely to be as open. . . . So that was a wonderful answer I got, Dalhousie, the university law school at Dalhousie. That was excellent.

Even so positive a meeting by no means left it clear that leaving a comfortable faculty position at the Dalhousie Law School to launch a new faculty in British Columbia was a good idea. British Columbia’s historical neglect of higher education was well known, and George Curtis was aware of the "persistent underfunding of the University" and of its consequences. A further private meeting with Senator Wallace Farris was accordingly set up. Dean Curtis has recorded the necessity for this meeting and its importance in personal recollections:

Before I left Vancouver, I thought I should double check the Bar’s position. That factor—the Bar’s attitude—to me was critical. The Bar of Nova Scotia made Dalhousie, despite small resources, the famous place that it became. Sir John Thompson and his colleagues at the Bar made Weldon’s work possible.
I decided to see Senator Farris privately, not only because he was the chairman of the Bar committee, but because I knew that when one member of the Bar consults another member for personal advice, he can count on straight-shooting. . . .
Senator Farris gave me his full mind on the situation as he saw it. He made no attempt to paint a rose-tinted sky: the government of B.C. was parsimonious in its support of the University. The risk was there: but the support of the Bar could be counted on.

On August 8, MacKenzie wrote to Curtis offering the deanship. Curtis accepted by telegram two days later. His reasoning was simple and straightforward: "The war was over. A new University president was in office. . . . It was time for optimism. A grant of $10,000 to start a law school could hardly rank as munificent; but with the Bar solidly behind me and a venturesome captain on the bridge, better days should be ahead." Senate approved creation of a law faculty at the end of August, Curtis arrived to begin work in Vancouver on September 4, and a university law faculty opened for business three weeks later.

Chapter 5 continued

Copyright © 1995 The University of British Columbia Faculty of Law. All rights reserved.
Please address questions or comments to Professor W. Wesley Pue, pue@law.ubc.ca