Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party-Part Nineteen

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party-Part Nineteen

Individual(s) who choose to present his/her own case are often intimidated and harassed into hiring attorney(s) at-law. This obviously is a violation of the law and the U.S. Constitution. BAR judges often use the quote "He Who Is His Own Lawyer Has A Fool for a Client”.

That quote has been attributed to Oliver Wendell Holmes, U.S. Supreme Court justice in the late 19th century. However that proverb appeared in The Flowers of Wit by English author Henry Kett, who published it in 1814. Some claim that phrase originated in Philadelphia in 1809. It has been stated that President Abraham Lincoln may have cited this quote in the mid-19th century.

While there is no proof that Oliver Wendell Holmes cited this phrase, one thing has to be certain. That phrase was never applicable to individual(s) who are not lawyers or attorneys at-law. That phrase was meant to be applied to lawyers who desired to present his/her case in a court of law. Individual(s) were never regarded as lawyer(s) as individual(s) never represented anyone else in a court of law. That phrase was meant to be applied to lawyers who regularly provided assistance to others.

That intent of that phrase was to prevent "professional counsel" from lawyering his/her own case as that would breed subjectivity and personal influence. It was not meant to restrict not just the right but also the responsibility of individual(s) from presenting his/her own case over the redress of grievances.

The U.S. Constitution does not mention the word "lawyer" and especially not "attorney at-law". That document made it clear that individual(s) had not just the right but also the responsibility to present his/her case in person. Flesh and blood appearance, arguments, and testimony directly from individual(s) were deemed essential for the proper adjudication of cases of controversy. The nation's charter also made it clear that individual(s) were only entitled to counsel's assistance in criminal cases. Individual(s) were not entitled to such assistance in civil cases. In criminal cases, individual(s) still were mandated to present his/her case in a judicial court of law. 

The next time individual(s) are pressured to hire an attorney at-law by using that phrase/quote, they must inform the court that this phrase/quote only applies to "professional counsel" who desire to present/her case. Moreover, its intent was to prevent that "professional counsel" from being subjective and personal by the presentation of his/her case. That phrase/quote never meant to apply to individual(s) who have no part in governance and therefore who cannot be perceived as participating in a conflict of interest.