'N I an I. 1 1 1.4:. .- 1! ~ . v- 1....111'. ‘ y L" ”H: N: N 9.11:” ml“ “‘1 18%? ,n‘.‘ |.'«.\ )1“.“v‘l..‘.::‘.m. 31.411 I} ”a“ v 11:17.3 “3' 2;!“ .1511... M “.1 - \n‘ \' :3 . {1:}?!- tpalot V“ . '4’... . F‘E , .3 i.“ ”'4 - 3.3“ 33...“. r . «a. . .9122." J‘; Wag“ «m. 1.4.: .. . .1 _ <1“. _ '3’ A r .‘..:’.I..., ... .ml . 31:51 1- ‘ p» .L "1.0;: ;uru 1:: rfj :— . $1 1' taro” "1.1;.‘37—7 .’ I .0 ~1: $.11- 2 .1 FCC" : o - ' . . f»: ’33; mag“. W‘T: 1". 251-“ rm. wmfixuW " _“' "tm..-::::;?.'$“'. at; -«l :3. 1 7M :5” ”-5‘"".; :0, " I.» I- “ .‘2. "'37.. 4"“ 5;. mm... NW N, n. , .. é: . m... '31.. .. . .m .9... I. r n t “1.... Wm".— . "1).. _.. ,1. - . um “£12,314 . ,1' is: 12:12:”. 125%?“ ~*",.,,:.-':'- 3.2% firxgrmwmwz' 1W" ”:3 i '7' ”ram L. “1'3 flirt ’5“ _w - LIE-Y3?!" 9?: If. .w L"- -713" "' fik'zvgilrmx . ‘ 1... n m! ‘ r V t‘ “I; “”;4.1";d& ! ' P. . , . A W. “F FF“. . a . ' ‘ Y " M, *5: ' w”; J L~4‘:-'iv§u—n.u-r . _ ’ ..... . , _.., : 8"“ a» “J“ :W“ m A “15?) 4‘! -)M“ _ 1v JISapfiufflu ’Waw‘m »::-&..~‘. ”M ;‘. ”W ”(m 47‘s 1 . MM» “2320 : L’I’4 *ya‘.’ 41% . . . - ..1 .. ’ V M: if $3.13“ 1.3. . I’J‘E-‘W J 1 “HO-4v ‘- A. “m -z'. hints . This is to certify that the thesis entitled Lawyers and Politics presented bg Benjamin Tamir Hourani has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for PhD degree in POlitical SCience gm 4 l ‘ L/ ' .. " J I Major PI‘OfBSSOI' Date February 22, 1966 0-169 ‘ LIBR A R Y Michigan Sta University PWfia-w - .--.....—— - ABSTRACT LAWYERS AND POLITICS by Benjamin T. Hourani The purpose of this study is to investigate how law- yers in different work situations relate themselves to poli- tics. The major thesis tested may be specifically stated as follows: the work situation of lawyers and their position in the hierarchy of the legal profession affect their percep- tion of the ”expected utility" of political rewards, their political participation, degree and kinds of involvement, level of political interest and possibly their personal political styles. The data necessary for testing this prOpo- sition were gathered from a sample of 144 practicing lawyers in the County of Ingham, Midhigan. The data were gathered by means of a structured and pretested interview schedule in the early summer of 1964. The majority of these lawyers re- side and practice in the city of Lansing. The results of this study do not directly point to any statistically significant differences in the overall degree of political involvement between lawyers in low-status work situations and those in high—status work situations. 2 Benjamin T. Hourani The data point to significant differences in the k£2g§_of activities in which lawyers in low-status work situations and those in high—status work situations engage. In other words, lawyers in low-status work situations tend to par— ticipate more in the politics of hierardhy, i.e., as active party workers and by holding office in the political party hierardhy and auxiliary organization. Lawyers in higher— status work situations, on the other hand, tend to be con— siderably more active in the politics of bargaining and dis- cussion through money contributions to political candidates and the exercise of influence on legislators and public officials by direct contacts, letterawriting and personal word-of-mouth communications. The data suggest further that lawyers' political participation in hierarchical politics decreases as they move upward in the professional hierarchy. The higher they climb, the more they seem to depend on the politics of bar- gaining, discussion and influence. The differences in the kinds of political activities in which different lawyers participate are due in part to differences in career or work stages, the value they attach to the expected rewards of holding office and the level of interest. Lawyers in low- status work situations, often in the initial stages of 3 Benjamin T. Hourani their career, attach higher value to the expected rewards of political office than those in high—status work situations and Who are in more stable stages of their career. Moreover, the former tend to consider seriously political offices at the local and state levels whereas the latter are willing to consider only offices on the national or federal level. Lawyers tend to use politics and political office more often as vehicles for professional escalation in a legal career than for political advancement or a political career. This is suggested by the fact that 63 percent of those who are now in the upper echelons of the profession have held party or other local political offices at some time. The most frequently held public offices were the same as those which seem very attractive to lawyers who are now in low—status work situations. These are invariably elected law-enforcement offices at the city and county levels. Law- yers seem to have a virtual mon0poly on these offices. other results indicate that lawyers with low social class background tend to perceive the utility of politics and political rewards in tangible-material terms more often than those coming from upper and middle classes. Adso, there is evidence which suggests that lawyers in low—status work situations tend to hold Machiavelli—like beliefs more 4 Benjamin T. Hourani frequently than those in higher-status work situations. Social background is found to be a contributive factor. Finally, Ingham County lawyers tend to lean towards an ideology of political conservatism. Lawyers in low- status work situations are considerably more liberal than those in higher—status work situations. The influence of inherited and adopted political party affiliations is very clear. Lawyers who come from Democratic homes and belong to the Democratic party are considerably more liberal than those who come from Republican homes and belong to the Republican party. LAWYERS AND POLITICS BY Benjamin Tamer Hourani A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Political Science 1966 @3 Copyright by Benjamin Tamer Hourani 1966 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my gratitude to Professor Joseph A. Schlesinger for the diligent guidance and support he gave me through all the stages of this study. I am indebted also to Professors Frank Pinner and Charles Adrian for reading this work and for their invaluable suggestions. I wish to thank Professor Jack Hunter of the Depart— ment of Psychology and his wife, Rhonda, for their assistance with research techniques, statistics and computer programming. Further, I wish to express my appreciation and thanks to all the lawyers in Ingham County who participated in this study and helped make it possible. I owe especial thanks to my wife, who typed the first draft of this work and who detected and eliminated the intrusions of linguistic obscurities. I would finally like to express my deep gratitude to my mother and family in Lebanon for their unfailing support, which enabled me to pursue my higher education in the United States. I would like also to thank my brother, Ramiz, of Lansing, for sharing my joys and tribulations, and for his constant encouragement and contagious good spirits. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii LIST OF TABLES o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o V LIST OF APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix Chapter I. THE PROMINENCE OF LAWYERS . . . . . . . . . . . . l The Legal Profession: Developments . . . . . . 5 Firm and Solo Lawyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 The Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Organization of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . 20 II. LAWYERS: SAINTS OR SINNERS . . . . . . . . . . . 21 The Nature of Law Practice. . . . . .‘. . . . . 22 Integrity and Independence of the Lawyer. . . "Bastions of Conservatism". . . . . . . . . . 25 Lawyers and Politics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 III. HYPOTHESES, SAMPLE AND METHODS. . . . . . . . . . 42 The Framework of Careers. . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Research Samples and Methods. . . . . . . . . . 55 IV. INGHAM LAWYERS: SOCIO-ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AND POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . 60 The Context: Ingham County . . . . . . . . . . 61 Ingham County Lawyers: A Profile . . . . . . 65 Measurement of Political Activity . . . . . . . 76 ‘Woodward and Roper's Political Activity Index: Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 iii Chapter Modified version of Woodward and Roper's Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Adjusted Political Activity Index: Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Political Activity and Personal Background. . V. 'WORK SITUATION AND POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF LMYERS . O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O ‘WOrk Situation.Defined. . . . . . . . . . . . ‘WOrk Situation and Type of Practice . . . . . ‘Work Situation and Career Stages. . . . . . . Work Situation and Type of Cases Mostly Handled by Lawyers . . . . . . . . The WOrk Situation of Lawyers and the Degree and Kinds of Political Participation. . . . Politics of Hierarchy and Politics of Bargaining . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'Work Situation of Lawyers and the Value They Attach to Holding Political Office . . Lawyers' WOrk Situation and the Kinds of Offices That Will Be Seriously Considered. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Aspects of Lawyers' WOrk Situation and Political Activity. . . . . . . . . . . Work History and Political Activity . . . Type of Cases Handled and Political Activity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI. STATUS OF WORK SITUATION AND THE PERSONAL STYLES OF LAWYERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Status of Work Situation and Perception of the Utility of Political Rewards . . . . Status of Work Situation and Madhiavellianism Lawyers' Conservatism and WOrk Situations . . VII. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B IBL IOGRAPHY O O O O O O 0 C O O O O O O O O O O O O O APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Page 84 86 92 101 102 105 108 109 113 117 127 131 134 134 137 144 145 149 158 166 175 188 . ‘ , . q ‘ , ‘ . . ‘ ‘ x -‘ ‘ ‘ ' - ‘ a . . . . , 1 . ‘ IV.1. IV.2. IVO3. IV.4. IVOSO IVO6. IV.7. IV.8. IV.9. IV.10. IVOll O IV.12. IV.13. LIST OF TABLES Average Net Income in Dollars (1954) . . . Lawyers‘ Income and Career Stages . . . . . Lawyers' Income and Work Setting. . . . . . Lawyers' Income and Type of Cases Handled . Lawyers' Income and Size of Law Firm. . . . Scoring System for Political Activity Index Ingham Lawyers and National Sample of Citizens O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ingham Lawyers and Selected Sub-groups in National Sample. . . . . . . . . . . . Ingham County Lawyers Distribution of Political Activity Scores . . . . . . . . Overall Political Activity by VOting. . . . Overall Political Activity by Discussion of Public Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . Overall Political Activity by Belonging to Organizations. . . . . . . . . . . . . Overall Political Activity by Times Written or Talked to Legislator or Other Public Officials. . . . . . . . . . Overall Political Activity and Working for the Election of Candidates in Past 4 Years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 11 69 70 71 72 80 82 83 86 88 88 89 89 90 Table IV.14. IV.15. IV.16. Iv. 17 O IV.18. IV.19. Overall Political Activity and Money Contributions to Political Candidates. . . Overall Political Activity and Participation in Political Party Organization. . . . . . Overall Political Activity and Age . . . . . Degree of Interest in Politics Before and After Graduation . . . . . . . . . . . Overall Political Activity and ”Interest in Politics Now" . . . . . . . . . . . . . Participation in Party Organization and "Interest in Politics Now" . . . . . . . . Overall Political Activity of Lawyers and Whether They Held Political Office . . . . Simple Correlation Matrix-aElements of work Situation 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Distribution of Lawyers by Work Situation Factors. . . . . . . . . . . . . Work Situation by Type of Practice. . . . . . WOrk Situation by Size of Firm . . . . . . . Status of Work Situation by Years in Practice (or WOrk Stage) . . . . . . . . . Status of Work Situation by Income (in thousands of dollars). . . . . . . . . Status of WOrk Situation by Type of Cases Handled. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'Work Situation by Martindale's Rating. . . . vi Page 90 92 94 95 98 98 99 103 104 107 107 108 109 110 112 . w A . .. 7 . '\ ‘ . , 1 , , . - -. . C , , A ’l Table Page V.9. Degree of Overall Political Activity by Status of Work Situation. . . . . . . . . 114 v.10. Status of Work Situation by Distribution of Last Political Post Held by Ingham Lawyers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 V.11. Participation in Political Parties and Status of Work Situation . . . . . . . . . . 119 v.12. Status of WOrk Situation by Number of Organizations Belonged to. . . . . . . . . . 120 v.13. Political Party Participation and Work Stages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 v.14. Times Written or Talked to Legislators and Public Officials by Status of Work Situation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 V.15. Money Contribution and Status of Work Situation. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 124 v.16. Status of WOrk Situation by Number of Times Voted in the Last Four Years . . . . . 127 v.17. Status of Work Situation and Value Attached to Holding Office . . . . . . . . . 129 v.18. Overall Political Activity and the Value Lawyers Attach to Political Rewards. . . . . 130 v.19. Level of Offices Which WOuld Be Considered by Status of WOrk Situation. . . . . . . . . 132 v.20. Distribution of Offices Considered Seriously by Status of Work Situation. . . . 133 v.21. Status of Work Situation by Work History . . . 135 v.22. Work History by Overall Political Activity . . 136 vii , . . .. y . y l! . .y . 11!: Ill. ukal.«In.A.'.L.n|i.LFE .1. ».. .I .1}: v 1 . .. S . i x x . . . . \s ::| 4 . w 7 ‘ ._ , W t. / ‘ . i \ Table v.23. v.24. VI.1. V1.2. v1.3. V1.4. V1.5. VI.6. v1.7. V1.8. V1.9. v1.10. V1.11. v1.12 0 V1.13. Type of Cases Handled by Participation in Political Parties . . . . . . . . . Type of Cases Handled by Role Performed. Types of Perceived Utility of Politics by Social Class of Father. . . . . . . Types of Perceived Utility of Politics by Overall PoIitical Activity. . . . . Machiavellianism by Status of WOrk Situation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Degree of Machiavellianism by Social Class. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Degree of.Machiavellianism by Career Stages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Degree of Machiavellianism by Type of Cases Handled. . . . . . . . . . . . . Degree of Machiavellianism by Lawyers' Legal Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Machiavellianism by Political Cynicism . Status of Work Situation by Political Ideology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Father’s Party Affiliation by Political Ideology of Lawyer . . . . . . . . . . Lawyer's Party Affiliation by Political Ideology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lawyer's Party Affiliation by Status of Work Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . Political Ideology by Machiavellianism . viii Page 138 140 147 148 152 153 154 155 156 157 159 160 161 161 162 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A. Letter Preliminary to Survey. . . . . . . . . . . . 188 B. Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 C. Madhiavellianism Index Items. . . . . . . . . . . . 208 D. Political Cynicism Index Items. . . . . . . . . . . 209 E. Liberalism—Conservatism Index Items . . . . . . . . 210 F. Significance Test for Product—Moment Correlation. . 211 ix CHAPTER I THE PROMINENCE OF LAWYERS The prominent role played by members of the American bench and bar in the history of the American government and business has been a particular source of pride for the Ameri— can Bar. Twenty-five of the fifty-two signers of the Declar- ation of Independence were lawyers, thirty—one of the fifty- five members of the Constitutional Convention were members of the Bar. Twenty-three of the thirty-six United States Presidents were lawyers.l During the period from 1877 to 1934, 70 percent of the Presidents, Vice Presidents and cabinet members were lawyers.2 Professor J. A. Schlesinger reports that of 995 men elected governors all over the United States in the period from 1870 to 1950, 456 were lEsther Lucile Brown, Lawyers, Law Schools and the Public Service (New Yerk: Russell Sage Foundation, 1948), p. 17. See also Donald R. Matthews, The Social Background of Political DecisioneMakers (New Ybrk: Random House, 1954), p. 30. H. Dewey Anderson, "The Educational and Occupa- tional Attainments of Our National Rulers," Scientific Monthly, XL (June, 1935), 511-18. . . 4 _ . C V a _ . . 1 . , ' ..l . . . . I l ; I . . . _ .. n v... ...- . -_ . .. l . . .L. 1-5”}!th Ivmlln.l1|..lllliu|llfl . .1. . J. x I. . \. ./ _ ./ )x / .\ ll. . . .. , 1|.IWI / 2L. 1 ..IIIJIIW b. 1. I. . I- | .. \ .l:l»..v .1 I \l 1.. I \ \ . \i ..... 4.3.-.- 741...: .1" ..J .v .... . .I H2 1.1...x. - ...L. -r- . II. - u ( .. . r . .51 ... . 1.! -J \ ... I practicing lawyers.l A survey made in 1943 of both houses of Congress re- ported that 66 percent of the members of Congress were law- yers--74 percent of the House of Representatives.2 Of the 175 members serving in the Senate of the United States in the period from 1947 to 1957, 54 percent were members of the bar.3 The 88th Congress is no exception. Of its 535 mem- bers, 315 are lawyers: 66 percent of the Senators and 57 percent of the Representatives.4 Of the 12,689 men serving in the lower houses of thirteen states and in the upper houses of twelve between 1925 and 1935, 28 percent (or 3,555) belonged to the legal profession.5 The percentage of lawyers in the State legislatures varies or often fluctuates. A sur— vey of the members of all State legislators showed that 1 J. A. Schlesinger, l'Lawyers and American Politics: A Clarified View," Midwest Journal of Political Science, I (May, 1957), 26-39. 2 Brown, op. cit., p. 17. 3Donald R. Matthews, U.S. Senators and Their World (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1960), pp. 33-36. 4Andrew Hacker, "Are There Too Many Lawyers in Congress?" The New YOrk Times Magazine (January 5, 1954), pp. 14, 74-75. 5 Charles S. Hyneman, "Who Makes Our Laws," Political Science anrterly, LV (December, 1940), 557. 3 . 1 lawyers constituted about 22 percent. A considerably higher percentage of lawyer-legislators were found in 1957 in the four state legislatures of New Jersey, Ohio, Tennessee and California: 52, 36, 30 and 30 percent respectively.2 Scores of lawyers are employed in government agen- cies at all levels. These lawyers are involved in litiga— tion, prosecution and other governmental functions. At least 13,000 lawyers are working for the Federal government alone. In the world of business the lawyer is often in an envied position of prominence. Fowler Hamilton, a prac- ticing lawyer, speaking of the close affinity between law- yers and business said: Every nook and cranny of modern business is per- meated by the law and the lawyer. It is almost impos— sible to think of business without thinking of the lawyer's role. If the businessman finds it difficult to live with a lawyer, he finds it impossible to live with- out him . . . engineers, accountants, market analysts, lBelle Zeller (ed.), American State Legislatures (New Ybrk: Thomas Crowell, 1954), p. 71. 2Heinz Eulau and John D. Sprague, "Lawyers in Poli— tics: .A Study in Professional Convergence" (Stanford Uni— versity, 1962), p. 2 (mimeographed). The entire study is based on data drawn from John C. Wahlke, Heinz Eulau, et al. in The Legislative System (New York: Wiley & Sons, 1962). 3U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1963 (washington, D.C.: Government Print— ing Office, 1963), p. 158. 4 economists, advertising men, public relations men et a1 come and go at the business conference table as discus- sion moves in and out of their special fields, but legal problems and the lawyer are present at almost every stage. . . .1 Professors Lasswell and McDougal stress the lawyer's potential to influence the decision—making processes in business-corporate concerns and see him as "the one indis- pensable adviser of every responsible policy—maker . . . as such an adviser the lawyer, when informing his policy—maker of what he can or cannot legally do, is in an unassailable 2 strategic position to influence, if not create policy. . . . Lawyers in private practice play a similarly signifi- cant role in domestic relations and other problems of the citizenry and the law. They exercise a considerable influ- ence by virtue of the legal counsel they give and the fiduciary relations they hold. In spite of the important role lawyers play in poli- tics, business and social relations, they are often viewed critically and with suspicion. The elements of this suspi- cion and other apprehensions are discussed in a later lFowler Hamilton, ”The Lawyer and Business," Fortune, XXXVIII (October, 1948), 179. 2H. D. Lasswell and M. S. McDougal, "Legal Education and Public Policy," in H. D. Lasswell (ed.), The Analysis of Political Behavior (London: Routledge, Kegan, Paul, Ltd., 1948), p. 27. bli‘ 1.1-.MlI-I.1IIIIII,IL - 5 chapter. The following paragraphs will concentrate on sketching, in brief, the developments in the legal profes- sion with an emphasis on its stratification. The Legal Profession: DeveloPments The growth of the American Bar, its proliferation and specialization were parallel and in response to changes in the structure of the capitalist system. The impact of in- dustrialization on the profession has not been felt until the turn of the century. Before then the individual general practitioners were able to manage their business easily. But with progress of industrialization many changes were effected. Some of these changes were the emergence of large- scale business corporations and the enactment of a series of regulatory laws, the purpose of which was to control trade and business transactions. These factors, added to the com- plex nature of the federal structure of government, made lawyers extremely indispensable and, more important at this point, made specialization inevitable. Industrialization and expansion of business towards the West made the corpora- tion a very useful legal measure of massing greater capital in business enterprises. The new ”legal personality" worked closely through the lawyers. The lawyer had to advise the corporation on the legality of its actions, defend and 6 legitimize its actions in society and vis-a-vis the politi- cal system. Under the Democratic administration of Wilson, the anti-trust laws including the Clayton Act, the Federal Commission Act and the Income Tax laws were enacted. Busi- nessmen became hard pressed for the lawyers' services, to solve the tangle of legal problems and face up to the gov— ernment.1 Lawyers were, in this manner, wedded to business and many of them.became business executives. This manner of complexity which did not slacken except temporarily stimu- lated c00peration between individual lawyers and gave rise to the firm lawyer and what has been referred to as the ”legal factories.” Firm and Solo Lawyers These developments in the legal and industrial com— plexity of society made specialization of functions inevit— able. Lawyers had to specialize to meet the specialized demands of this complex society and in order to be able to compete. The functions of the general practitioner came to be served by several specialized lawyers and by giant organi- zations. The general practitioner has found himself being stripped of his functions and soon became unable to compete for an honorable living as his predecessors were able to lHamilton, op. cit., p. 184. achieve. Solo lawyers had to go into partnership or seek other employments as salaried lawyers in government service or private business.1 The strain on the general practitioner came also from the increased supply of lawyers who had simi— lar ambitions and similar images of their role as he had when he entered law school. As will be indicated below, the majority of lawyers are individual practitioners who fill the lower ranks of the legal profession. Industrialization and the complexity of modern society have produced what Jack Ladinsky called the "bifur- cated“ bar; and it may even be referred to as the trifur— cated bar.2 The legal profession became a stratified hier— archy of large law firms on the top and solo lawyers at the base with smaller size firms in between. The firm lawyers, the elite of the profession, are a class by themselves. In contrast to the traditional general practitioners, they rarely appear in courts, they handle business matters and give business counsel on highly Stuart T. Saunders, “Law and Business: Corner- stones of Our Economy," American Bar Association Journal, XLVIII (February, 1962), 154. 2Jack Ladinsky, "Career Development Among Lawyers: A Study of Social Factors in the Allocation of Professional Labor" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of Michigan, 1963), p. 2. 8 specialized legal Operations and spend most of their working time at the conference table or in the law library. This segment of the profession is relatively small and is to be found in large metropolitan centers. Large law firms, from the early part of the century on, grew in size and power. Thus by 1948 there were 284 law firms with eight or more partners. There were 99 large- scale firms with over twelve partners and a large number of salaried lawyers and staff workers.1 In New Yerk, for in- stance, some such organizations are composed of 150 and a total staff of 250 to 300.2 The recruitment of firm lawyers is highly elaborate. Large law firms draw their recruits mostly from the Ivy League colleges and those with the highest quality of educa- tion. They prefer a "special kind” of lawyer over others. As put by Erwin O. Smigel, these firms ”prefer the man with all three attributes: lineage, ability, and personality . . . [and] from the right” school and with the "right" 3 . social background. The emphasis on recruitment in these 1James W. Hurst, The Growth of American Law (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1950), p. 307. 2Robert T. Swaine, "Impact of Big Business on the Pro- fession: An Answer to Critics of the Modern Bar," American Bar Association Journal, XXXV (February, 1949), 89-92. 3Erwin O. Smigel, "The Impact of Recruitment on the Organization of the Large Law Firm," American Sociological Review, XXV (February, 1960), 57. 9 large firms is due to the fact that new lawyers who are ad- mitted as "associates” will soon become partners. Smaller law firms are scattered in the urban cities and towns all over the United States. These firms range from two partners to seven or eight plus several staff work- ers. A. A. Berle, Jr. speaks commendably of these smaller firms because the members are "lawyers rather than solici- tors." From this group would emerge the scholars of the bar.1 These lawyers are in close touch with the community; they engage in politics as well as practice law. The re- cruitment of lawyers to these firms is not as elaborate or formal. At the bottom of the hierardhy are the two-partner family enterprises and the solo lawyers. These are to be found generally at the lower ranks of the legal profession. With the possible exception of those in prosperous towns, this group comprises the marching lawyers who work day and night to earn a living, chasing ambulances, litigating divorce cases and handling extremely routine work for vari- ous individual clients. In the lowest ranks of this stratum 1A. A. Berle, Jr., ”Modern Legal Profession," Ency- clopedia of Social Sciences (New YOrk: Macmillan Co., 1938), IX, 340-346. 10 are those who lead a dangerous life at the brink of the underworld, especially in the big cities. Solo lawyers or the individual practitioners make up the masses of the legal profession (about two-thirds or more).2 The low status of individual practitioners is gener- ally attributable to the quality of their education, their social origin, type of legal work they engage in and other factors connected with their work situation and social rela- tions. Often using income alone as an index is sufficient to show the discrepancy between individual practitioners and firm lawyers. The incomes increase according to the number of partners or size of the partnership (see Table I.1). Furthermore, it seems that opportunities for individual law- yers become limited especially when they are competing with laymen or men in the fields of real estate, insurance and the like in a large metropolitan center. Some of the major sources of stratification of the legal profession are to be found at least in part in the lC.‘W’right Mills, White Collar: The American Middle Classes (New YOrk: Oxford University Press, 1951), p. 128. 2Albert P. Blaustein and Charles 0. Porter, The_ American Lawyer: A.Summary of the Survey of the Legal Pro- fession (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1954), p. 8; Tweed, Harrison reports that throughout the country 68 per- cent of the lawyers practice alone and that percentage is higher for big cities. See Table I.l. 11 popularity of the profession as a means for upward mobility. A career in law has often been viewed by young people as an occupation whereby a person can attain influence and wealth without a great deal of capital to start with. The success of prominent men with a legal training became a persistent example for ambitious young men. Further, this ambition to go into law has been greatly facilitated by the openness of the democratic system and the minimum requirements of legal training. TABLE I.l.--Average net income in dollars (1954) W Lawyers Mean Median Solo 7,315 5,485 2 Partners 11,169 9,022 3 Partners 14,830 12,407 4 Partners 19,824 14,812 5-8 Partners 23,849 20,571 9 or more 36,102 27,159 Source: Harrison Tweed, "The Changing Practice of Law: The Question of Specialization," American Bar Associa- tion Journal, XLVIII (May, 1962), 423-28. Data were arranged by the writer. 12 The night-school and the part-time legal education have contributed to the surplus of solo lawyers. These schools, Catholic and proprietary colleges, were graduating many lawyers every year. Often these schools were referred to as the "diploma mills." J. E. Carlin notes that: "Dur- ing the twenties, the period of maximum growth . . . of the profession as a whole, the size of the bar in the largest cities increased by well over fifty percent."1 Carlin goes on to say that "this marked expansion was effected largely by the influx into the ranks of the individual practitioners of the graduates from the rapidly expanding night schools."2 The growth of the night law schools, Catholic colleges and part—time legal education was parallel with the flow of immi- grants. These schools have certainly made it easier for immigrants and their sons, if they so desire, to enter the legal profession. Thus another factor indirectly contributing to the stratification of the legal profession is the immigrants' avid desire for upward mobility. The appeal of the law as a profession was perfectly suitable to the desires of the Jerome E. Carlin, Lawyers on Their Own (New Bruns- wick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1962), p. 23. 21bid. ..f...‘ ...]. .. ...x 13 immigrants to climb.1 In his Presidential Address to the Association of American Law Schools in 1915, Dean H. S. Richards of the University of Wisconsin commented: If you examine the class rolls of the night schools in our great cities, you will encounter a very large pr0portion of foreign names. Emigrants and sons of emi— grants remembering the respectable standing of the advocate [supplied] in their old homes, covet the title as a badge of distinction. The result is a host of shrewd young men, imperfectly educated, crammed so they can pass the bar examinations, all deeply impressed with the philosophy of getting on, but viewing the Code of Ethics with uncomprehending eyes. Actually lawyers of ethnic origins (first and second generations) fill the ranks of the individual practitioners and constitute the majority of lawyers today. In a random sample of 207 solo and firm lawyers chosen from the Detroit area.bar, there are indications that about 59 percent of the solo lawyers and only 10 percent of the firm lawyers are 3 first and second generation Americans. Ladinsky is tempted to refer to individual practitioners as the "ethnic bar" J=‘Sam.1:lé:l.Lubell, The Future of American Politics (2nd ed.; Garden City: Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1956), chap. 4, "The Frontier Reappears," pp. 81-85. 2As quoted by Joseph T. Tinnelly, Part-time Legal Education: A Study of the Problems of Evening Law Sohools (Brooklyn: The Foundation Press, Inc., 1957), pp. 6-7. 3 Jack Ladinsky, “Careers of Lawyers, Law Practice, and Legal Institutions," American Sociological Review, XXVIII (February, 1963), 48. 14 because of their station and peculiar origin. Still another factor that has probably contributed to the increased surplus of the individual practitioners was the emergence of the common personal injury cases and the contingent fees that are often associated with these cases. Contingent fees were welcomed by the individual practition- ers who found this type of case a lucrative business. Finally, the Great Depression and the coming of the New Deal made the government enact more controlling legisla- tion referred to earlier. These developments enhanced the position of the established firm lawyers in both government and business. The general practitioners had to struggle for survival and many of them had to turn to other salaried em— ployments. In this manner the gulf between the upper-level firm lawyers and the lower-level solo lawyers was greatly widened. These developments, together with other stereotypes, contributed to an intensification of criticism of lawyers and the legal profession (see Chapter II). Some were indig- nant at the "decline" of law as a profession. Others directed their attack at the relations of lawyers to business. C. Wright Mills, for instance, contended that "the public has l Carlin, op. cit., p. 22. 15 become what the public has been for the lawyer's chief client--an object of profit rather than obligation.”l And still others lamented the erosion of "professional ethics" especially among the newcomers. Many critics dwell on a fairly extensive list of ap- prehensions based mostly on special cases of practicing law- yers or others in public office. Observing "shysters" or others who make the headlines and who are not necessarily typical of the larger body of lawyers all over the country does not warrant the often—made generalizations. Other apprehensions are based on assumptions that are not necessar- ily true, e.g., the study of law and use of precedent lead to conservatism. Many other apprehensions are voiced with regard to the presence of a large number of lawyers in poli- tics. The question remains, are political lawyers typical of the rest of the members of the Bar? The Problem The relation of lawyers to the political system is generally obscure. In spite of the fact that lawyers consti- tute a sizeable proportion of the membership of Federal and State hierarchies, and the role lawyers played and still 1Mills, op. cit., p. 122. 16 play in the American society, they have not received the attention they deserve from political scientists. The re- search that has been undertaken herein attempts to contrib- ute to the understanding of the lawyer's relationship to politics. How do lawyers relate themselves to the political community? What type of lawyers are especially interested in politics? What particular incentives attract lawyers into seeking political office or into becoming active in politics? And finally, what is the nature of the personal backgrounds of lawyers that predispose them toward active participation in politics as a means of satisfying their ambitions? That lawyers as a professional group are a sub-elite from.which many of the members of the United States politi— cal elite often come can hardly be over—emphasized. The importance of lawyers in the American society attracted the attention of De Tocqueville. Writing in 1835, he pointed out that: "The special information which lawyers derive from their studies ensures them a separate stgtion in society, and they constitute a sort of privileged body in scale of intelligence. . . ."1 Another observation he made is related l A. De Tocqueville, Democracy;in America (New YOrk: Oxford University Press, 1945), I, 278-85. -._../.1 ilk. 17 to the prospects of lawyers in a particularly democratic milieu such as that of the United States. He wrote: The government of democracy is favorable to the political power of lawyers; for when the wealthy, the ndble, and the princes are excluded from the government, the lawyers take possession of it, in their own right, as it were, since they are the only men of information and sagacity, beyond the sphere of the people, who can be the object of popular choice. This View, though perhaps biased, as Hurst indicates, by the contacts De Toqueville made in the Eastern states, 2 lawyers remain in advantaged positions in American politics. In a mass society such as that of the United States where a considerable degree of apathy is present among the plebeians, lawyers, by virtue of their education and position, may yet become the likely "opinion leaders" and natural recruits for political office. Together with advertising men they will 3 tend to correspond to the "priesthood" of society. Yet be- fore any such generalization can be made seriously, some basic research must be done to understand the lawyersl 1 Ibid., p. 285. 2James Willard Hurst, The Growth of American Law (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1950), p. 250. 3Harold L. Wilensky, "Work, Careers, and Social Inte- gration," International Social Science Journal, XII (Fall, 1960), 543-560. The characterization of lawyers as the "priesthood" or "high priest" was used by Ferdinand Lundberg in his article "The Priesthood of the Law," Harper's Maga- zine, CLXXVIII (April, 1935), 515-26. 18 interest and involvement in politics. The Purpose Determined to take a fresh look at the relationship of lawyers to politics, this writer proceeded to investigate the behavior of lawyers in their everyday life and as they relate themselves to politics. Studying lawyers in public office alone may shed some light on the problem but does not necessarily clarify its various dimensions. Lawyers in pub— lic offices are not representative of the large body of law- yers in the country. In fact, one may hypothesize that lawyer-politicians may have different norms and perspectives than those dominant in the legal profession. A comparative study of lawyers in public offices and lawyers in practice is needed. The sample oflawyers in practice studied in this work is only a beginning. Here the researcher will focus on the behavior of lawyers at work and will take into account the differentiation in the position of lawyers in the hierarchy of the legal profession. The lawyers' work situation-awork setting, type of practice, type of cases handled, income and years in practice——may be very helpful in explaining the lawyers' participation in politics. Study— ing the lawyers' involvement in politics while in practice may help explain how lawyers View politics, what kinds of 19 lawyers are likely to be interested and active in politics, and may possibly shed some light on the lawyers' career per- spective and the points in their career where they may be most attracted to politics. Using the work situation ap- proadh for the understanding of the political participation of lawyers and with minimum commitment to a priori assump- tions or residual explanations, this writer hopes to explore further the relation of lawyers to politics. Thus the purpose of this study is to investigate, using mostly field research, the relation of lawyers to poli- tics. It is essentially a study in political participation. In this case, it is the political participation of members of the legal profession. In more specific terms, this writer will investigate the following thesis: that the work situation of lawyers and their position in the hierarchy of the profession affect their perception of the "expected utility" of political rewards, their political participation, degree and kinds of involvement, level of political interest and possibly their personal political styles. It is often suggested that lawyers in the low work situations will tend to be more active in politics than lawyers in higher work situations. The writer will consider this hypothesis, accept or reject it, and try to offer an explanation based on em- pirical data. .___.1 v ._.¢ 20 Organization of the Study This study consists of seven chapters. In addition to this chapter, which it is hoped gave some perspective to the important role lawyers play in politics, Chapter II will comprise a discussion of the major apprehensions concerning the role of lawyers in social life and politics. This study will attempt to answer and explain some of these apprehen- sions on the basis of the research findings. Chapter III contains a brief statement of the major hypotheses to be in- vestigated, the nature of the universe of the lawyers studied and the tools used for collecting the necessary data. Chapters IV, V and VI will contain the research findings under the respective titles of: "Ingham Lawyers: Socio- Economic Background and Political Involvement," "Work Situ- ation and Political Activity of Lawyers," ”work Situation and Personal Styles of Lawyers.” Chapter VII will contain conclusions and recommendations for further research. ..z _ .4 .....v‘ _ . .1 ._ . L - ..J/u - \ .J¢ CHAPTER II 1 LAWYERS: SAINTS OR SINNERS Several times in history the lawyers have come under the attack of social critics. The style of professional people, like the medicine men of the early past, has been viewed by the common man with respect mixed with a feeling of suspicion.2 Medical doctors were supposed to know the secrets of life and death and lawyers of justice and injus- tice. Social critics, too, seem to have mixed feelings about these highly specialized professionals even today. Lawyers were in prominent positions in government circles, high legislative bodies, courts, business and other impor- tant phases of human living. Their closeness to objects of authority and the nature of their practice have stirred some speculation and aroused some apprehensions. In this Chapter we shall point out some of these apprehensions and refer to some of the studies that dealt with them. 1Title is borrowed from Beryl H. Levey's Corporation Lawyer . . . Saint or Sinner? The New Role of the Lawyer in Modern Society (Philadelphia: Chilton Co., 1961). 2 Fred Rodell, Woe Unto You Lawyers (New Ybrk: Reynal and Hitchcock, 1939). See chap. I entitled "Modern Medicine- men." 21 a .. ._ ...; . . .. I .. ._ .. . - . _ - . J . . - .. I .. . - . . ._/_ _ - . .- ...' I.- .- ,_. L. .- . ‘ .... .. _. .a - _. . . J . .. J..- . . . l J - -. ..._- l . ‘— _- . .. . .1 l- .. — ._ ..z_ '. . . 4. . _ .- _ .JL . . . . l . -1 ... ~ -. . .. . , I . - _ .. .2 . . - \ . .. - .4 '..a... _ . . ' n I . ._ . . . . . . '- . . -~-- . - ..- - _ . . .1—0 .. .-..-.) _ . . . _. . '... " \. .‘ . ..Jd u ' - ‘..- .._ '1 . . ,' ' .. , ._ ' _‘. v, _ .J.‘.. L, ...: .vs . ' ._ \ ¢ .. - ..‘ . .. I. - I . . ._ . .1 . .. . . o . . . . . . 22 The Nature of Law Practice The nature of the lawyer's profession often is too difficult to understand, especially by the common man. The custom of pleading for a defendant or plaintiff, without serious discrimination between what is right and what is wrong, somehow leaves much to be desired. Neither the defen— dant nor the plaintiff can escape the lawyer's fees no mat- ter how the case is settled. In many cases, the defendant and the plaintiff come out of a case feeling that the law- yers on opposite sides of the case are much like the blades of shears; they cut whatever comes between them, but never each other. ”I never," said Voltaire, "was ruined but twice-—once when I gained a lawsuit, and once when I lost one." The lawyers, however, are always remunerated. Again what goes on in the pleading of cases is found to exaggerate and distort evidence to an extent that justice loses some of its sanctity. The whole process often precipi- tates doubt in the process of justice and in the lawyer's profession. Justice suffers miscarriages and the lawyers remain as Sir Thomas More left them: "the sort of people whose profession it is to disguise matters. . . . 23 Integrity and Independence of the Lawyer Daniel Webster is quoted as saying, Our profession is good if practiced in the spirit of it; it is damnable fraud and inequity when its true spirit is supplied by a spirit of misdhief-making and money—getting. . . . The love of fame [he continued] is extinguished; every ardent wish for knowledge repressed; conscience put in jeopardy, and the best feelings of the heart indurated by the mean, money-catching, abominable practices, which covei with disgrace some of the modern practitioners of law. Similarly, in the 1930's, when this nation was in the midst of a crisis, the attention of one writer was again directed to the lawyer and the legal profession. Lundberg, in a series of articles in Harper's Magazine, lamented the condi- tions of the American legal profession and attributed a good deal of the blame to the lawyers. Whatever social injustice was inflicted on the common man was said to be partly due to the inability of lawyers to detach themselves from the busi- 2 ness interests of their big business clients. Firm and corporation lawyers were especially blamed for their inabil- ity to stand by the side of the poor man. Low-level, inde- l 0 Quoted in Tryon Edwards, The New Dictionary of Thoughts (New YOrk: Standard Book Company, 1952), pp. 329—30. 2Ferdinand Lundberg, "The Legal Profession: A Social Phenomenon," Harper's Magazine, CLXXVIII (December, 1938), 1-14; "The Law Factories: Brains of the Status Quo," Harper's.Magazine, CLXXIX (July, 1939), 180-92; and "The Priesthood of the Law,” Harper's Magazine, CLXXVIII (April, 1939), 515-26. --~‘ ;.;.p-: _~ " 24 pendent lawyers, too, were found to have their sins. These lawyers were found unfit to carry on the traditions of the profession because of their “scant training" and lack of the noblesse oblige of the upper classes. They dealt with the shady side of the law and often followed unfair practices, often in violation of their professional Code of Ethics. (Some of these charges are said to be equally true today and especially of big metropolitan centers.) In sum, the "priest— hood of the law" was found wanting, causing a major reason for concern. A more serious element of concern is the inability of the lawyer to detach himself of his client's business in- terests. In modern society it is not uncommon to find law- yers as partners in their client's business. They can be found often acting as public relations men, members of the boards of directors and sometimes active shareholders. The independence of the lawyer is essential to the independence of his judgment. Bias and possibly a conflict of interest may arise especially when these lawyers, ”officers of the court," become parties in the lawsuits in which their moneyed clients are involved. Other than prejudicing the lLundberg, "The Legal Profession: A Social Phenome- non,” pp. 1—14. _..-_...— __ 25 traditional concept of justice, this active attachment to business interests hampers the lawyer's ability to create or support innovation and progressive interpretation of laws 'and precedent. As noted earlier in the literature, lawyers serving business are commonly found in the upper echelons of the profession and are relatively few. The less privileged lawyers in whose ranks are to be found the "ambulance chaser" and shady operators cannot help the common man while struggling for existence. The integrity and independence of the lawyer, reminiscent of the past, seems more difficult to preserve than ever. The dilemmas resulting from the stresses and strains and sometimes the decline of the pro- fession have led Harold Laski to suggest some measures to socialize this corps of men. His object, of course, was to make lawyers less "dependent on the hazards of the commer— cial market.”1 He even went on to cite favorably the exper- ience of Soviet Russia in support of his suggestion! "Bastions of Conservatism" A third major source of concern has been over the fact that a high percentage of legislators at the national and state levels are lawyers by profession. Over a century 1Harold J. Laski, "The Decline of the Professions," Harper's Magazine, CLXXI (November, 1935), 682. 26 ago, De Tocqueville observed that a democratic society is especially favorable to the political power of lawyers part— ly because of the absence of established aristocratic groups and partly because, in a true democracy, the peOple will tend to recruit their politicians on the basis of individual merit rather than family or class. He further observed that, "By birth and interest, lawyers belong to the people; by habit and taste to the aristocracy; and they may be looked upon as the natural bond and connecting link of the two great classes of society.” This "aristocratic” element, he believed, by its dedication to individual liberty and free- doms, will stand as a major barrier to tyranny of the major— ity. It is also implied in his writings that lawyers are progressive elements with a serious concern for the people. This image of the lawyer has been questioned several times almost a century later. Modern writers spoke of lawyers in less complimentary terms. The "over-membership" of lawyers in national and state legislatures was viewed by some as a conspiracy of the legal profession. Others View legal education in itself as a handicap rather than advantage in the deliberation pro- cesses of the higher political assemblies of the nation today. There are still others who claim that lawyers are attached to the upper classes or business to the extent that 27 they tend to tread upon rather than defend the rights of the individuals in the lower classes. Most of the elements of the controversy are present in the common concern over the ”conservatism" of the legal mind. In the following para— graphs we shall discuss some of the elements of the contro- versy. The legal mentality, if at all it exists, is said to be characterized by "hair splitting" and narrowness. One ex-professor in Congress, describing his lawyer—colleagues, sums up this argument in the following: "Too often the lawyer, hanging on every word and finding many meanings in every phrase, sees only the details and not the full sc0pe of a bill.”1 The over-concern of the lawyer with language and technicalities may go beyond exasperating the lay- legislator to undue delay, and to constrain "legislative imagination.” Quibbling about the letter of the law, if motivated for a political advantage, could be used to "talk a bill to death." After all, aren't lawyers masters of the delaying action? Conservatism also is said to arise from the nature of legal training. The legal mind is said to be preoccupied with the search for precedent and hence this lHacker, op. cit., p. 74. 28 tradition would tend to constrain creativity, innovation and change. Lundberg, cited earlier, sharply answers those who say that lawyers, by virtue of their practice and the fact that they base their arguments on historical precedent, are conservative. He said: While this is true [that lawyers and jurists use historical precedent] it is generally overlooked that lawyers, if required to, are just as able to quote precedent in support of rapid social innovation. . . . The appeal to history is not necessarily conservative; Karl Marx proved that.1 Liberal legislators with legal background are not difficult to find on the American scene. It is yet to be proven that lawyers' professional education truly affects their poli- tics. It probably is easier to prove that lawyers' ideolo— gies are determined more by the social class they belong to rather than by their legal background. One may easily cite, as an example, the Southern delegation to the Congress in support of the latter argument. Of the 106 Southern Repre- sentatives, 74 are lawyers by training. Once intent on resisting innovation they often used their legal training and skills to a decided advantage. If it is not education or class, could it be the lawyers' clients that affect the l Lundberg, "The Legal Profession: A Social Phenome— non,” p. 10. 29 alleged conservatism of the lawyer? Lawyers‘ connection with big business is often used strongly in explaining their conservatism. It is not that the conservatism of the businessman is contagious; rather the serving of business interests makes the lawyer behave more cautiously. The lawyer's independence presumably is restricted by the nature of the retainer relationship be- tween himself and the businessman. Naturally, it is argued, lawyers serving businessmen do represent the lat— ter's interests both in and out of legislative assemblies. There is very little to support this common apprehension, although it is often referred to and is sometimes taken for granted. The problem is a carry—over from the basic diffi- culty of maintaining the independence of the lawyer in cases involving the ordinary citizen. At the political level, the concern again is due to the possibility that the lawyer may become overly occupied with defending business to the detriment of the interests of the common man. The accusation that lawyers are generally conserva— tive is often drawn on the basis of their behavior in Con- gress. The charge of conservatism becomes credible and serious in cases concerning the scope of government and constitutional issues concerning the Supreme Court functions with regard to civil liberties. The Jenner-Butler Bill is a ‘ ‘ ‘ - ' : .. . c- ~ — . \ I . v I I - - . _. J . _ _ _ .. “I - _ . 1 ‘- I J I ' " ' ' - -..a .1 _. ‘. _ _ . _ _ - . - I - d ' - - I . J __ . r _ _ J _ _ ' I ‘ — ‘I - I“ J - I .. - - _ _ _ .. ". ‘ _. .- . .1 _ _ I _ J _ _ - H I ‘ J - - - - 7 . .. ~ ~ - V — I -- . I .- 30 case in point. The purpose of the bill was to severely limit the Appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over cases arising from the subversive-control laws of the states. The bill passed the House by a vote of 241 to 155 but was defeated in the Senate by a margin of one vote only. An investigation of the votes showed that the majority of the lawyer—legislators in both houses supported the bill while the majority of the lay—legislators Opposed it.l Andrew Hacker, the latest critic of the lawyers in Congress, pointed to the role of the lawyer—legislator in the House Committee on Un-American Activities and charged that they forgot the fundamental commitments they are supposed to hold with regard to civil liberties. He further accused them of succumbing to public opinion pressures--sometimes more quickly than their lay colleagues-—and thus failed to be the kind of barrier against the tyranny of the majority that De Tocqueville had hOped. What follows illustrates Hacker's charges: Most members of the House Committee on Un-American Activities . . . have been lawyers, yet they have been almost uniformly insensitive to suggestions that wit— nesses be permitted to cross-examine their accusers, or that innocence should be presumed until guilt is l Hacker, op. cit., p. 74. 31 proven. On the contrary, hearings have been televised, and committee members have felt free to combine the roles of judge, prosecutor and jury. Legislative investigations may not be "trials" in the formal sense, but they have the consequences of judicial proceedings for many who run afoul of them. If safeguards for witnesses are needed, the demand has been studiously ignored by the Congress. The members of investigating panels who have legal backgrounds give every indication of having left their professional credentials at the door when they began exposing the presumed misdeeds of subversives, trade-union officials, corporation executives and government employees.1 The concern over the conservatism of the lawyer and its possible consequences in everyday life calls for some sys- tematic search in this area. Robert Agger, alerted to the problem, expressed the need for research as follows: The phenomenon of conservatism among lawyers to the extent it exists is not disturbing per se, but when political mechanisms for social change are monopolized by lawyers and become mechanisms for per- sonal power and reward—awhether harnessed to social change or to status quo--the great number and influ- ence of lawyers in politics deserves to be questioned. There are no indications that the trend to recruit lawyers into political positions of importance is slowing down; rather, it is rapidly increasing. Some of these charges are often accepted on their face value yet evidence may prove that they are not warranted. lIbid., p. 75. 2 RObert E. Agger, "The Lawyers in Politics," Temple Law_Quarterly, XXIX (Summer, 1956), 439. 32 There are other sources of concern with regard to the lawyers' participation in politics. Beside the concern over the qualification of the lawyers' education and the entry of the ”ethnics" into the legal profession, there is concern over the "correctness" of holding political office while maintaining legal practice. Many of the lawyer— legislators maintain their law offices back home. These circumstances precipitate at least two questions. Local ties may over—commit the lawyer to local interests and probably local machines to the extent that it might hinder his role in legislative assemblies and other political decision-making bodies. The other question is about the political lawyer's business. Is all business that comes his or his partner's way inspired by purely "disinterested motives"? The uproar that arose in 1964 with regard to this question in Albany, New York, attests to the serious- ness of the problem. Some social scientists have already begun to show interest in investigating some of these apprehensions. Most of their efforts have so far been limited to lawyers in pub— lic office or conducting survey studies on law students. These efforts nevertheless represent a start. Charles Hyneman and David Derge addressed themselves to the concern 33 over the fact that most legislative assemblies all over the country are predominantly made of lawyers. Is it a "con- spiracy" on the part of lawyers and the legal profession? Hyneman, in his study of the Houses of thirteen states cited earlier, indicated rather clearly that the "over-membership" of lawyers in these legislatures cannot be construed as over-representation. He stressed that "over-membership" is quite different from over-representation. Thus apprehension over "the conspiracy" of lawyers and the legal profession was not much warranted. David R. Derge, on the basis of data drawn from two state legislatures, Illinois and Missouri (1955 and 1957), reported that there was no sub- stantial COhesion in the voting behavior of lawyer-legisla- tors, nothing that compares with farmer—legislators. Lawyer-legislators did not react to policy decisions on the basis of professional identification. In contrast to other groups in these legislatures, lawyer-legislators showed more initiative in sponsoring bills.3 The fact that lawyers were found sponsors of bills more often than non-lawyer- lHyneman, op. cit., p. 569. 2 . David R. Derge, "The Lawyer as DecisioneMaker 1n the American State Legislature," Journal of Politics, XXI (1959), 408-33. 3 Ibid., p. 424. 34 legislators does not by itself necessarily indicate a de- cided leadership role. Further, both Hyneman and Derge addressed them- selves to the question of conservatism.1 The assumption that the ”legal mind" should tend toward conservatism is not accepted. Hyneman found no evidence ”to support the supposition that law practitioners, when considering legis- lation, are bound up by a precedent—mongering habit."2 How— ever, Derge also reported similar conclusions drawn on the basis of the voting behavior of lawyers on a number of issues that came to a vote. The often-made inference that lawyers are the "bastions of conservatism" was again re— jected by Derge. He found no necessary relationship be- tween the attitude of the state legislator and his profes- sional training. "On the contrary," Derge said, "a tenta- tive conclusion is that the political attitudes and be- havior of lawyers are quite similar to those of the non- lawyers, and that the most significant difference is be- 3 tween political parties." The contention that lawyer- 1H. J. Laski indicated as early as 1925 that "It is almost an inevitable characteristic of the legal mind that it should tend to conservatism." In A Grammar of Politics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1925), p. 572. 2 Hyneman, op. cit., p. 579. 3 Derge, op. cit., p. 431. .. 35 legislators should be more conservative than non-lawyer- legislators was also rejected by Eulau and Sprague, at least for the four legislatures they studied in 1957.1 This writer will address himself to some of these questions to the extent possible. The data collected, however, do not allow any serious comparison between practicing lawyers and lawyer-legislators or non-lawyers mostly because of the limited sample studied and the differences in the methods used in the gathering of data. Lawyers and Politics The apprehensions concerning the image and position of lawyers in society and in politics discussed in this chapter point to the need for more systematic research. Without this kind of research it will be very difficult to go beyond speculation and simple common sense generaliza— tions. Students of politics interested in assessing the impact of lawyers on the political decision-making process and the political system as such cannot make any progress without understanding the relation of lawyers to politics. In this section it may be appropriate to discuss briefly a few more-or—less speculative materials concerned with the lEulau and Sprague, op. cit., p. 19. 36 relation of lawyers to politics. Max Weber suggested that lawyers will play an in- creasingly important role in Western democracies because of the compatibility of their profession and that of the modern politician. The basic compatibility of the two professions, according to weber, derives from the lawyer's skill as a pleader.l The skill of pleading, he predicted, will fit very well with the need to sway large groups of people. Further, lawyers as pleaders may be especially instrumental in the functioning competition of pressure groups in a democracy. Yet pleading in the courtroom and the skill of oratory are waning characteristics of the modern and suc- cessful lawyer in the United States. Pleading is a neces- sary skill only in certain types of cases--e.g., criminal cases——and is a function of trial lawyers. weber speculated further that lawyers may be economically "dispensable." Riesman, referring to this concept, indicated that lawyers are able to give up the practice of law for another 1 Max Weber, Politics as a Vocation," From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, ed. and trans. Hans H. Gerth and C. wright Mills (New YOrk: Oxford University Press, 1958), pp. 94, 95. 2 Ibid., p. 85. l» U.S.; IL 37 political job without losing much in the process.1 Thus lawyers may be more dispensable than, for example, medical doctors. Lawyers may be in a better position to afford an interruption in their legal career than medical doctors, especially when they View politics as an instrument for social and occupational mobility. The concept of dispens- ability, as a tool of interpretation, seems to be an im— provement over the "legal skills" hypothesis because it takes into account the work situation of the lawyer and implicitly the rewards of political involvement. These rewards, of course, may be perceived and evaluated dif- ferently by members of the legal and medical professions. Schlesinger, in a study reported earlier, concluded on the basis of substantial evidence that the compatibility of the professions of law and politics "operate to the ad— vantage of lawyers primarily when they are career politi- cians."2 A career politician has to be a highly involved political worker with an eye to holding political office or simply an office4holder with an ambition to a higher office. lDavid Riesman, "Introduction" to Stimson Bullitt's What It Means to be a Politician (New York, Garden City: Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1959), pp. 11-24. (Mr. Bullitt is a lawyer and a politician. He makes very insightful observa- tions as to how law as a profession "shelters" a politician!) 2Schlesinger, op. cit., p. 26. 38 On the basis of the same data, Schlesinger drew another significant conclusion. The advantage that the lawyer has in politics, he said, "derives not so much from generalized political skills as from specific legal skills which give him a monopoly of offices related to the administration of law in the court system."1 These particular offices are those of "officers of the court," judgeships or public at- torney. In practice these positions are filled by lawyers. These positions have also served as strategic stepping- stones to higher and more general political offices in American politics. In this dissertation, the writer will investigate the relation of lawyers to politics by examining the ecology of lawyers in practice and specifically their work situation and position in the hierarchy of the legal pro- fession. The hypotheses stated in Chapter III are derived for the most part from findings and Observations reported in the literature on the sociology of work and the professions particularly. Some of these Observations were reported in the pre- ceding chapter. They stress the stratified structure of 1 Ibid., p. 27. 39 the profession and indicate considerable differences between its upper and lower ranks. Considerable differences were found in the amount of the lawyers’ earnings, clients, social origins and prestige. The gulf between the upper ranks and lower ranks of the profession is also widening because of the development of group practice in the form of law firms, the elaborate and differential recruitment prac- tices of these firms, emphasis on specialization, and the entry of greater numbers of immigrants' children into the profession mostly via the "diploma mills." Some of the general Characteristics of those in upper and lower ranks have already been described. These differences, while perhaps not as dramatic in less metropolitan areas, may still be relevant to the under- standing of how lawyers in the upper and lower ranks of the profession relate themselves to politics. In the literature one finds scattered observations that suggest the importance of variables such as work conditions and status in the hier- archy of the profession in determining behavior. C. Wright Mills, for instance, suggested that large firm lawyers, be- cause of their connection with big business, would tend to be interested in national politics. He added that the in— terest of these lawyers in politics would often be spurred by their business relations and tend to be only a "means of 40 realizing its [the firm‘s] economic interest."1 Lawyers in smaller firms, he said, would tend to be interested in state and local politics and would aspire to hold positions on the bench or other locally elected offices. Lower-level lawyers would tend to be engaged in activities confined to legal practice and making a living. There are other observers who suggested that lawyers who come from lower classes and who have attended less known schools would tend to be more active in politics than those who come from more privileged classes and have attended better known schools.2 Some have hypothesized more specifically that lawyers would be active in different political arenas to the extent to which these arenas are perceived as useful for career advancements. These various Observations impress upon the writer the importance of investigating the lawyers' work situation, status in the hierarchy of the profession and other aspects connected with the lawyers' background and political per— 1 Mills, op. cit., pp. 121-29. zMatthews, U.S. Senators and Their World, p. 53; see also, David Gold, "Lawyers in Politics: An Empirical Exploration of Biographical Data on State Legislators," Pacific Sociological Review, IV (Fall, 1961), 84-86. 3Walter I. Wardell and Arthur L. Wood, "The Extra— Professional Role of the Lawyers," The American Journal of Sociology, LXI (January, 1956), 306. .. ‘ ...: .. I .' _ . . . . . - ., - _ . . . -.. J-‘ . . . . . . ‘ _ . .. ... .. . . . .. . . . . .. , . ._ _ . . . ._ . I ‘ _ ' _' - '. . _ . . .. .. . 3 . _. .... - - .s . .. . ...] . I.-- - J I . J— n — ~ I -7 I< - I I ~ . -. . . - .. . . . I - . -_ . . _ _ .-. . I _. . ... _ - . . . . . . . . . . . c ' l - - - . . . . . .. . _ . .. __ . l . . . _ . . - . a I \ ’ — — n - 41 spectives. How the work situation and differences in status affect the lawyers' political behavior will be investigated in the light of empirical findings. The apprehensions concerning the role of lawyers in society indicated in this chapter will also be discussed to the extent possible. Lawyers have been depicted by critics as either saints or sinners. The critics' approach tends to contribute to the lawyers' distorted image. In this work an attempt is made to examine some aspects of the lawyers' orientations for possible clues to their present unflatter- ing image. What kind of lawyer is in fact conservative? And What kind of lawyer is actually manipulative or Machia- vellian? In each case, however, the special tools used to determine these characteristics are still in the experimen- tal stage. CHAPTER III HYPOTHESES, SAMPLE AND.METHODS As stated in Chapter I, the major concern of this dissertation is to understand the relation of lawyers to politics. The study will consider the relation of lawyers to politics by investigating some major aspects of the ecol— ogy of lawyers in practice rather than in political office. Lawyers have been studied before, but almost every time in their capacity as office—holders. The latest study on law- yers is that of Heinz Eulau and John D. Sprague entitled Lawyers_;n P0113198: A StudygipvPrgjgssipnal Convergence. The study is a by-product of a study on legislative be— havior in four state legislatures. Thus it is based on a select group of office-holders among whom a certain pro— portion are lawyers. Lawyer—legislators are not necessarily representative of the large body of lawyers in the country or in the four states that were studied. In fact, lawyer— legislators might have different backgrounds, norms and 1This is now published under the same title by BobbséMerrill Co., Inc., New York, 1964. 42 43 perspectives than those dominant in the profession at large. There are other students of political science attempting to study the relation of lawyers to politics by studying the perspectives of law school students. Here again, While the approach could be useful, it cannot tell very much about how lawyers in practice relate themselves to politics. The ecol- ogy of student life is very much different than that of prac— tice and the realities of making a living. In this work the writer will make use of what might be called the "situational approach." This approach empha— sizes the significance of studying lawyers in practice and how they relate themselves to politics while still at work. Thus the factors that suggest themselves by the use of this approach pertain mostly to the lawyers' work conditions, type of practice, years in practice, the type of cases they handle, etc. Such factors, although difficult to assess completely, would serve to determine to a large extent the political behavior and perspectives of lawyers. This ap— proach could certainly be manipulated fruitfully by polit— ical scientists studying lawyer—politicians provided they trace back their backgrounds and the antecedent career stages through which they passed. Further, the approach used here seems very much suited for studying members of professional groups partly rutfijrfi‘ _ . ' 44 because it enables the researcher to investigate variations in behavior and perspectives that parallel each career stage or position in the hierarchy of professions. An investiga— tion of lawyers along these lines is attempted in this work. In the following paragraphs this writer will offer a brief description of the nature of professional and Occupational work in an attempt to delineate the underlying career struc— tures through which professional men pass. This discussion will help explain how the hypotheses in this chapter were derived. Thg Framework of Careerg Occupations generally and professions particularly have a built—in framework determined more or less by the nature of the division of labor and the labor market de— mands. Even in the state of flux that society finds it- self, there seems to be a substantial measure of organiza— tion in the world of occupations and professions. In professions there are what corresponds to hierarchies of positions. These positions are the result of specialized functions, opportunities and channels that widen and nar- row and sometimes change. Becker and Strauss, in referring to the latter emphasis, indicate: The occupations and organizations within which careers are made change in structure and direction i i -..--.---.- .-. r. . .1 .. ..-.......-.. L...Ff1»i...z.¥...d . EU. 45 of activity, expand or contract,transform purposes. 01d functions and positions disappear and new ones arise. . . . Such occupational and institutional changes . . . present opportunity for both success and failure.1 Positions on top have different work conditions, work set- tings, tasks, clientele, and pay-offs than positions in the lower ranks. People recruited to the top positions may even come from certain groups or classes, better schools, or have had different work histories than those in the lower positions. Mobility within the hierarchy of the profession is also subject to restrictions and standards imposed on its members by the labor market, not to mention others laid down by the profession's exercise of its own mandate over affairs pertaining to it.2 Thus it seems that in profes- sions "the career of a man is worked out in some organized system without reference to which it cannot be described, 3 . . much less understood. . . . Such an organized system is found in the legal profession. 1Howard S. Becker and Anselm L. Strauss, "Careers Personality and Adult Socialization," The American Journal of Sociology, LXII (November, 1956), 262. 2C. E. Hughes, "License and Mandate" in his Men and Their work (Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1958), pp. 78-87. 3Ibid., "Preface," p. 9. 46 Careers in law can be classified into two categories or work settings, ipgtitutional and independent work set— tings.1 Institutional work settings include employment in government and quasi-government agencies, teaching and aca- demic life, private business, industry and labor unions. Independent work settings is comprised of private group practice (law firm) and private individual practice. These categories and the avenues within each constitute the formal opportunities for students of law. Choices to enter any of these work settings depends on the lawyer's specializations, quality of education, ambitions, differential recruitment practices and a host of other personal circumstances. Initial work stages in any of these work settings may be a form of temporary employment in business, government or a law firm. Decisions at the initial stage may affect the rest of one's career in law. A lawyer may decide to stay where he is; for others, it is the time to try to shift from one work setting to another. The majority often will turn into independent practice. Ambitious lawyers often wish to join an established group of lawyers in a firm, others choose to practice alone. Here again the recruitment 1Ladinsky, "Career Development among Lawyers . . . , p. 37. 47 process is selective and often restrictive. Lucky are the lawyers Who enter a firm for they enter into an established concern. The others who choose to put up a shingle vow to sweat and toil until they make it. Career mobility lines in independent private prac- tice can be frustrating. Passage from the initial stage of work to a relatively more defined stable stage can be dif— ficult for those seeking to practice on their own. It often involves a shift or a movement from salaried to independent self-employment, where initial capital and contacts are diffiChlt to come by. Similar problems of mobility may be encountered in group or firm work settings. The passage from the initial stage to a more stable stage within a firm can be equally frustrating unless the junior associate proves to be a particular asset to the senior members. Once a junior associate in a firm is successfully initiated into the status of junior membership, he is assured of a rela— tively stable practice and particular rewards. As indicated in the literature, the legal profession is stratified. Those lawyers who are in firms and handling business cases tend to be in the upper echelons, whereas those in solo practice and handling domestic and personal injury cases comprise the majority of lower echelons. The differences between the upper and the lower echelons of the 48 profession may be specially dramatic in large metropolitan centers. In a smaller community these differences may not be as pronounced as one may expect from a review of the literature. Nevertheless, they do exist. In Ingham County, as will be indicated in Chapters IV and V, differences be— tween solo and firm lawyers do exist in terms of income and type of cases they handle. Income and type of cases han- dled, however, are only two indicators of the variation in the positions of the hierarchy of the profession. There are other indicators that are equally important such as the size of the firm of partners, years in practice and whether lawyers are in full— or part—time practice. It is partly for this reason that this writer prefers to use "work situation" rather than solo or firm for describing the relative position of lawyers in the hierarchy of the Ingham Bar. In Chapter V the reader will find a more sys— tematic discussion of this crucial variable. This brief description completed, the writer will restate the ques— tion to be investigated and the answers thereto in the form of testable hypotheses. Hypotheses The question to be investigated in this dissertation is this: Whether variationg in the work gituation of law— yersyand their position in the hierarchy of the profession 49 affect their perception of the "expected utility" (i.e., value) of political rewards, degree of politiggl activity and kinds of involvement, and possibly their personal po— litical styles. The dependent variables contained herein will be discussed in greater detail in later chapters. 1t suffices at this point to indicate that political activ— ity and kinds of political involvement will be measured by means of a modified version of Woodward and Roper's polit— ical activity index.1 It will be discussed at length in Chapter IV. Hypothesis 1: Egg lawyers' degree of political activity is inversely relatpd to their work situation and position in the hierarchy of the profession. In other words, lawyers in low-status work situations will tend to be more active in politics than those in higher—status work situations.2 The underlying assumption is that lawyers in low—status work situations, who are expected to be often lJulian L. Woodward and Elmo Roper, "Political Activity of American Citizens," American Political Science Review, XLIV (December, 1950), 872—76. 2Work situation refers to the work conditions in which a lawyer is ”caught" or finds himself. The adjec— tives "low," "middle" or "high" describe the variations in the work conditions or the environment in which the lawyer operates. These work conditions determine also the relative status of the lawyer in the hierarchy of the pro- fession. See Table V.2. 50 on-their—own, handling domestic and personal injury cases, in the initial or less stable stages of their careers, and with relatively low incomes, will perceive politics as an avenue for richer and steadier clients. Political activ- ity could provide the publicity which a less established lawyer in the community may need badly. In addition to becoming known by prospective clients, politics offers the opportunity to meet the county and state officials and others interested in law enforcement. Further, political involvement may be perceived as a vehicle for political advancement and holding office. Lawyers in low work situations may be particularly interested in holding local offices that might be used as a spring- board for higher political offices. Needless to say that holding office at the local level would provide the lawyer considerable experience in the workings of the law in addi- tion to access to community influentials and publicity—— all of which are highly prized by less established lawyers. Lawyers in high work situations often are men with long standing in the community, in more stable stages of their careers and hence would not be interested in attract- ing clients as much as maintaining their already going business in law and their more or less steady clients. If active in politics, these lawyers would be active through 51 channels different than those used by those in low work situations. Hypothesis II: Lawyers in low—stgtps work gituations will be more active in political parties and groups that take a stand on public issues than lawyers in higher—status work situations. In party circles lawyers, in addition to becoming exposed to prospective clients, could meet party leaders face to face. Here less established lawyers seek— ing patronage would have the opportunity to assure the local party chiefs of their fidelity to the party. Lawyers in higher work situations may have already held a local office at one time or another and feel less compelled to join in relatively mundane hierarchical politics. They would rather contribute money and use other informal chan- nels of influence to achieve their ambitions. The degree and kinds of political activities engaged in by lawyers in different work situations depend also on their evaluation of the rewards of public office. Hypothesis III: Lawyerp in low—gtatus work situa- tions will tend to attach higher value to the reward§_of holding public office than do lawyers in high-gtatu§_work situations. The rationale is the same as that offered to explain political activity (see Hypothesis 1). 52 Hypothesis IV: Layyers in low-status work situations will tend to_perceive the utility of political rewards in tangible-material terms more often than lawyers in higher- status work situations. Lawyers in lower situations are expected to View politics and political rewards in tangible— material terms or personal gain (e.g., advancement of legal business, advertisement and business contacts to improve the quality Of clients). Lawyers in high—status work situations are expected to perceive political rewards in intangible- symbolic terms (e.g., public and civic duty). It may further be hypothesized that those who view politics in tangible— material terms will tend to be more active in politics than those who perceive it in intangible-symbolic terms. It may be indicated at this point that both of these hypotheses could not be fully accepted. The manner in which lawyers perceive the utility of political rewards seems to be af— fected by the social class they come from rather than simply their work situation. Lawyers who come from upper or "status- stable" classes tend to perceive political rewards more in intangible—symbolic terms more often than those who come from the "newcomers." As will be indicated in Chapter VI, the data gathered does not permit investigating whether these differences in perception would reflect differences 53 in the motivation for political participation. In fact, the impression gained by this writer suggests that these lawyers are motivated to participate in politics more for practical reasons rather than ideological commitments. Finally, an attempt will be made to investigate some aspects of the lawyers' orientations and "ideological" styles. This is an attempt to understand some of the ap— prehensions often voiced (see Chapter II) and to see whether concern is at all warranted. Are lawyers in lower—status work situations more Machiavellian and cynical than those in high—status work situations? Are lawyers in higher- status work situations and who service business clients more "conservative" than those who are in low—status work situations and who service poor clients? These questions will be investigated under Hypothesis V. Hypothgsis V: Lawyers' personal political styles are directly related to their work situation. That is, law— yers in low-status work situations are expected to be rela- tively more Machiavellian and cynical than those in high— status work situations. This may be due to the pressures that less established lawyers encounter in trying to pass to higher echelons in the profession. Those who are already in high positions may not be subject to such pressures any more . 54 The other aspects to be examined are whether law— yers in high—status work situations are, in fact, more con— servative than those in low—status work situations and whether differences in the type of cases handled enter into this picture. Conservatism will be measured by an index developed by Michigan Survey Research Center specifically to test people's attitudes toward the scope of government and change. Lawyers in high—status work situations are expected to be more conservative than those in lower—status work situations partly because of the type of cases they handle (business—corporate—commercial) and partly because of the stable stage they have reached in their careers. This is often a stage when a lawyer is established and has an assured steady clientele. In this manner he might have a stake in maintaining the status quo. Before concluding this section, the writer will indicate a final hypothesis that is incidental to this study, but which, nevertheless, lends support to the em- phasis the writer puts on "work situation.“ The data col— lected for the purposes of this study permitted the testing of the following hypothesis: the political activity of lawyers is inversely related to their social class back— ground. In other words, lawyers coming from lower social (or less privileged) class will tend to be more active in 55 politics than those coming from upper classes. As will be indicated in Chapter IV, this hypothesis was found unaccept- able. It should be pointed out, nevertheless, that social background factors were found to conjoin other factors af- fecting certain perceptions held by Ingham lawyers. Thus social background factors cannot be totally discounted. Research Sample and Meth9d§_ Most of the analysis in Chapters IV, V, and V1 is based on data collected for the purpose of testing the above indicated hypotheses. These data were gathered from a sample of 144 practicing lawyers in Ingham County, Michigan, in the late spring and early summer of 1964. The sample comprised 89 percent of the total population of practicing lawyers of the county. -A list of names of the lawyers was obtained mainly from the Lgpping Area Telephone Directory and the 1964 Martipdgle—Hpbble Law Directory.1 The decision to conduct this research in Ingham County rather than any other larger metropolitan area was due to the fact that the writer is more familiar with this 1This is a national directory of the legal profes— sion. It tells whether the lawyer is in a firm or on his own. Further, it tells in code form the "rating" of the lawyer, year he entered the Bar, and sometimes gives an estimate of worth. 56 area than any other; and more important, financial limita— tions did not permit a more extensive survey in other remote areas. The instrument of research was a structured inter— view schedule designed to elicit the responses to a variety of questions. The questionnaire was tested on a few law— yers in the city of Saginaw, about 70 miles northeast of Lansing. The testing stage was useful. The test lawyers were extremely helpful and suggested a rephrasing of some questions. TWO firm lawyers, at the testing stage, gave their unsolicited contribution by timing the interviewer with the aid of stop watches they had fixed on their desks. This led to the elimination of a number of questions, thus cutting the interview time to a reasonable 55 minutes. Later, interviewing in Lansing was more pleasant and satis— factory partly due to this curtailment of the number of questions to be asked and partly because of an improved interviewing technique. At the initial stage, that is, before going out into the field, the writer tried to enlist the support of the President of the Ingham County Bar Association. The latter refused to formally endorse the project but was made to appreciate and sympathize with the writer's 57 efforts.1 The next step was to send to every lawyer a per— sonal letter which had been signed by the Chairman of the Department of Political Science at Michigan State Univer- sity.2 The letter explained the purpose of the research and introduced the writer to the individual lawyers. It also told them to expect a phone call from the interviewer to arrange an appointment to be held at their convenience. It further assured the lawyers of the privacy of the inter— view and that the contents would be strictly confidential. The letters were mailed in batches, a procedure intended to keep pace with the progress of the actual interviewing. It helped keep the letter and the purpose of the interview fresh in the minds of the lawyers. Judging by the response, the letter was very well received. The actual interviewing went along satisfactorily and without serious delay. The organization of the inter— view consisted generally of the following sequence: the respondent was handed one or the other of two sets of 1The writer felt it was essential to get the con— fidence of this gentleman so that when lawyers called him for more information about the researcher he could allay their suspicions or fears. The writer insisted on inter- viewing him first, and did. 2See Appendix A. 58 colored, clipped sheets, on which were found the scale items (without any distinguishable order).1 The respondent was asked to check the box that represented the degree of his agreement or disagreement with each statement. Next, he was asked a series of questions concerning his work situation, personal background, political activities and ambitions. waard the end of the interview, the lawyer was handed the second set of colored sheets to complete. The last step was to hand him a white sheet with an income scale and ask if he would mind indicating his income. Only 6 percent of those interviewed refused to indicate the amount of their income. This system proved to be practical and efficient. The ac— tual interviewing time ranged from half—an—hour to two hours. No stop watches were used. The interviewing itself had no boring moments. Most lawyers seemed to get a "big kick" from checking the two sets of colored sheets. It was inter— esting to the interviewer to watch these lawyers argue aloud with the scale items, "split hairs,‘ and sometimes rip the items apart. The total job of interviewing was finished in about two months (April 20, 1964, to June 20, 1964). In the first lSee Questionnaire in Appendix B. 59 month over 50 percent of the lawyers were interviewed by the writer. For the purpose of interviewing 162 lawyers in the county, the writer enlisted the services of a "veteran interviewer," After some coaching and supervision of the first two inter— views, which she conducted on a trial basis, she was on her own. The two of us were able to complete the rest of the interviewing before June 20, 1964. Only 18 lawyers (11 per— cent) were not interviewed. Some of these lawyers were out of the state on business or on their summer vacations. Only one lawyer refused to permit an appointment to be interviewed. The sample of lawyers interviewed consisted of 71 in solo practice, 15 employed (or serving as junior members of law firms) and 58 in group practice. Some differences in work situation between firm and solo lawyers were apparent. Offices of firm lawyers were more impressive, carpeted and well furnished. Solo lawyers, except for a few, were less impressive. It was common to find two and sometimes three lawyers in a suite with one secretary serving them. In the following chapter the writer will discuss in greater detail the outstanding context in which Ingham law— yers operate, their social and political background and the degree to which they are active in politics. 1The Department of Political Science at.Michigan State University helped pay for her employment. a lady with considerable charm and experience.1 -.. fi‘. CHAPTER IV INGHAM LAWYERS: SOCIO-ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AND POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT In this chapter the writer will discuss the context in which lawyers in the sample operate, the general compo- sition, and character of a legal career in Ingham County. In the later sections of this chapter the writer will dis— cuss how the political activity of Ingham lawyers was mea— sured and will also report some preliminary results con- cerned particularly with the lawyers' degree and kinds of political involvement. Lawyers in this county seem to be fairly active in politics and especially at the local level. This general result, in the absence of comparative data, will be more understandable after the context in which the lawyers operate has been described. Thus the discussion below seems very necessary because it underscores the unique— ness of the political situation and the opportunities for a successful legal business in the area. 60 61 The Context: Ingham County .Ahmost all practicing lawyers in Ingham County reside in Lansing, the state capital, and East Lansing, which is a university town. Because it is the capital of Michigan, the city of Lansing is the center of considerable political ac- tivity. It is the seat of the state government administra- tion, the legislature and higher courts. In addition to the city government, the city houses the Offices of the Ingham County Prosecuting Attorney. It also serves as an alternate to Mason as the county seat. Both the Democratic and Repub— lican parties have their headquarters in Lansing. The ‘ presence of all these political bodies generates unique political opportunities for involvement and political alert- ness. Thus it is possible that lawyers in this city do operate in a political situation that is not typical even for cities of the same size. A political situation of this kind offers Lansing lawyers considerable exposure to office— holders and administrative officials and perhaps opportuni— ties to perform a linkage function between the people and their representatives and government bureaucracy. Via law— yers, interest groups, businessmen and individuals can operate to influence decision-makers in the vicinity. Need— less to say, at the same time the lawyers themselves can benefit in the process. The benefits can be in the form 62 of increased legal business or political advantage. Ingham County is predominantly Republican and the degree of competitiveness between the two parties is low at this level.1 The Republican party is well intrenched in the county. In fact, Lansing has been a safe Repub- lican stronghold in almost all national elections. In the 1962 national election, the Republicans captured 61.1 percent of the votes in the city and 63.1 percent of the county.2 Moreover, all the elected offices at the county level are captured regularly by the Republican party. Further, the Republicans are considerably better organized than the Democrats. In the city there exists a very active and influential Young Republican Club and other Republican dominated civic groups. The Democrats, in contrast, have no continuously active extra—party organization. The Young Republican Club assumes special importance in this pre— dominantly Republican county. In fact, many lawyers in the sample indicated some connection with this organization at present or in the past. At the city level elections are lLeo F. Kennedy, "Attitudes of Precinct Chairmen Toward Party Organization" (unpublished Master's disserta- tion, Department of Political Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing), p. 31. 2Ibid., Table I. 63 officially "non—partisan"; nevertheless, there are indica- tions that the Republican party organization in this city takes an interest in city candidates and lends a helping hand.1 The political situation at the county and city levels, it appears, limits the opportunities of the Demo— crats and definitely enhances the position of the Repub- licans. The offices most desired at this level (e.g., City Attorney and the Assistant City Attorney, the County Prosecuting Attorney and about ten Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys, and Municipal and other local judgeships) have been captured by Republican lawyers. The Democratic law- yers in Lansing have better chances of getting patronage from office-holders at the state level. These may be in the form of "chores" to be done for Democratic legislators, business via the office of the Secretary of State and pos— sibly appointments in the Attorney General's Office.2 The latter two offices have been occupied by prominent Democrats. The economic activity in the city is equally ad- vantageous for a lucrative legal business. The City of lIbid., pp. 29 and 30. 2The writer came across two lawyers who were taking time off to help in the preparation of campaign material for an elected state officer. 64 Lansing is an expanding industrial and commercial center. It has a population of approximately 113,058 and a labor force of slightly more than 75,000.1 In 1960, the govern- ment employees comprised 20 percent of the labor force of the city. Approximately as much as 27 percent were em— ployed in automobile and metal manufacturing (Oldsmobile, Fisher Body, Motor Wheel, Reo and John Bean).2 Except for forges and auto part plants, these large industries are absentee—owned. As a center of commerce and trade the city has, in addition, many business companies and numerous re— tail stores. It has a very active Chamber of Commerce. In the city are located the headquarters of various state, business, labor and professional associations, including the Michigan Bar Association. The next largest city in the county is East Lansing with a population of approximately 30,000; Mason, the county seat, Williamston and Leslie follow with a population less than 5,000 each.3 1William H. Form and W. L. Sauer, Community Influen- tials in a Middle—Sized City: A Cagg Study, General Bulletin No. 5 (East Lansing: The Labor and Industrial Relations Center, Michigan State University, 1960), pp. 1 and 2. 21bid. 3Population statistics are from the 1964 Directory compiled and published by the Ingham County Clerk. See p. 27. 65 The city of Lansing may differ from some other middle—size cities in the east and midwest in that it has a relatively small minority of foreign—born and Negro workers. These groups constitute about 10 percent of the city population. As much as 66 percent of the native born are descendants of New England migrants and later German immigrants.1 The community "influentials" are, for the most part, successful businessmen with wide contacts and are generally college-educated. Seven—tenths of the manual workers own their homes. Generally, the city is an attrac- tive place because of its relatively small size and its community atmosphere. Similar views were expressed by others who did research in this city.2 Many of the lawyers who have recently moved to the city and were interviewed in this study expressed concurring views. Ingham County Lawyers: A Profile Lawyers practicing in Ingham County are not typical of others practicing in similar middle—size cities. While the career pattern may be generally similar to patterns in 1Form and Sauer, op. cit., pp. 2 and 3. 21bid. 66 other cities, the chances for success seem to be better here partly because of the size and the general political and economic situation described above. Lawyers in solo prac— tice constituting 49.31 percent are the largest single group though not to the extent as is often the case in large metropolitan centers. Lawyers in partnership (firms) con— stitute as much as 40.28 percent and those employed or "associated“ are only 10.42 percent. In the city there are as many as seventeen firms ranging in size from two to eight partners. Only two firms may be considered relative— 1y large in the city of Lansing. Each of the large firms has 7—8 "members." The next two largest are firms with 5—6 members and as many as ten with 3—4 members and only three firms with less than 3 partners. The two firms con— sisting of 5—6 members had just recently become incorporated. Some firms, with the exception of the top four, practice as a partnership in certain law cases and not in others. This led the writer to take note that some lawyers in a group may operate under "assumed—name" giving the appearance of incorporation while in fact there is none. These "firms" are referred to, nevertheless, as incorporated firms partly because of the difficulty of checking the correctness of 67 their claims.1 The majority of the employed or junior associates are employed by the larger firms and often are new graduates or in the initial stages of their careers; at least two are sons of senior members. Lawyers in Ingham County may also be relatively more successful than lawyers practicing in similar size cities. At least in terms of income, lawyers on their own in this county seem to earn considerably more than $6,100, the national average income of lawyers in similar type of practice (1955).2 In Ingham only as much as 18.18 percent of those in solo practice earned less than $10,000 (see Table IV.2 below). In the absence of income statistics that permit useful comparisons it may be appropriate to discuss the relative income of lawyers in the sample by 1In the last stages of the interviewing the writer realized variations in the responses to questions designed to determine the nature of those in group practice and the relation of lawyers in a firm to each other. The question asked was "Do you share fees?" In the same group or firm some answered "yes," others "no." After investigation it was found that some of these lawyers operate under what they call "assumed name." This is one reason why in Chap— ter V "work situation" becomes a more useful concept than work setting or type of practice as such. 2The figure for the national average is cited in Daniel J. Cantor, "An Economic Comparison of Lawyers in Private Practice," New York State Ear Journal, XXXIII (1961), 448. 68 relating it to the years in practice or what will be referred to hereafter as career "work stages." Lawyers who have been in practice 1-5 years are estimated by the writer to be in the "initial stage" of their legal career; those who have been in practice for more than 6 years and less than 15 are in their "transitory" or "transitional stage" and those who have been in practice for 16 or more years are considered to have entered the "stable stage." A cross correlation of income and years in practice shows that income is directly related to years in practice or work stage. The majority (54.55 percent) of those who are still in the initial stages of their career have relatively low income (less than $10,000) compared to those in the transitional (7.55 percent) and those in the stable stages (10.42 percent). It has been possible in Lansing for as much as 33.33 percent of those in the initial stage to earn middle-size incomes (between $10,000 and $19,000) and for as much as 12.12 percent to go beyond the $20,000 mark (see Table IV.l) .1 1The fact that only 24.63 percent of the lawyers have been in practice less than five years and that the majority have been in practice for many more years indicates that the rate of turnover may be as low as 3-6 lawyers a year. This suggests that a career in law in this area can be quite steady. 6 9 TABLE IV.l.-—Lawyers' income and career stages.* Initial Trans. Stable Stage Stage Stage 3—5 yrs. 6—15 yrs. 16 yrs. and over Tbtal Low (less than 54.55 7.55 10.42- 20.15 $10,000) (18) (4) (5) (27) Middle ($10,000— 33.33 54.72 35.42 42.54 $19,000) (11) (29) (17) (57) High ($20,000 12.12 37.74 54.17 37.31 or over) (4) (20) (26) (50) 24.63 39.55 35.82 100.00 (33) (53) (48) (134) r = .42 p <..OOl *Excluded from this table are 10 cases whose income was not ascertained. For tests of statistical significance see Appendix F. The differences in income between those in solo prac— tice and those in firms exist. Table IV.2 shows that as much as 59.26 percent of those who are members in law firms earn incomes beyond the $20,000 level, Whereas only 27.27 percent of those in solo practice go beyond this mark. The differ— ences are not as dramatic as the case may be in large metro- politan centers or other middle-sized cities. Lawyers who are associates or employed may hardly reach the high income bracket without becoming senior members or transfer into a different work setting. 70 TABLE IV}2r—Lawyers' income and work setting.* Income Solo Associate Firm Total Low (less than 18.18 64.29 11.11 20.15 $10,000) (12) (9) (6) (27) Middle ($10,000- 54.55 35.71 29.63 42.54 $19,000) (36) (5) (16) (57) High ($20,000 27.27 00.00 59.26 37.31 or over) (18) (O) (32) (50) 49.25 10.45 40.30 100.00 (66) (14) (54) (134) r = .23 p 86.11% Active 32% 29% 33% 10.42% Inactive 37% 37% 31% 3.46% It would have been interesting if similar data were available on specific groups of professional men such as medical doc— tors, college professors, journalists, realtors or even insurance men. Further comparisons are necessary especial- ly between lawyers practicing in small and medium-sized towns and those practicing in larger metropolitan centers. 84 Unfortunately, until such studies are available there is little data on which to base comparisons of Ingham lawyers. The study undertaken herein, it is hoped, is a step in the right direction. Modified version of Woodward and Roper1§_Inde§ For the purposes of this study, the writer found it necessary to introduce two changes to the above described instrument. The immediate purpose of these changes was to increase the discriminating power of the instrument. The first adjustment was to add a question of two parts. This question is: "Are you presently involved in any political activities?" and (if "yes"), "What activities?" Lawyers replying "yes" got one point bonus and those replying no got one point less. The point gained or lost was added or subtractedfrom the subject's original score, that obtained by Woodward and Roper's instrument. Thus, if Joe Doe's original score was 9 and if he answered "yes" to the first part of the above question, the final score for this sub— ject would be 10. The operation, in other words, is that the original score 11 equals the final score. Beside the element of the time dimension there are at least two more advantages. First, this addition helps the researcher to know what the respondent understands by the phrase 85 "politically active" as it might mean something slightly different from that carried in the Index. In fact it did. Almost everyone asked understood it to mean some connection with a political party. There is also the advantage of adding to the Index a measure of the respondent's personal evaluation of his own relation to politics. The second ad— vantage is in the attempt to counter—balance the over— emphasis given to "voting" in the instrument. The second part of the question, as will be noted later, offers the opportunity of developing an index of political participa— tion in party activities and institutions as a counter— point to the overall Index. The second adjustment involves moving the cutting points upward. WOodward and Roper classified as "Very Active" those who scored as little as 6 points out of a possible 12. This seems to be a generous classification. It cannot be justifiably applied to lawyers and specially for the purpose of this study. The writer chose arbitrar— ily to classify lawyers scoring 10—13 points as "Very Ac— tive," 7—9 as "Moderately Active" and 6 or lower as lAlfred DeGrazia suggests adjustment of the Index by raising the score from 6 to 9 points. For his comments see his Politics and Government, Vol. I: Political Be- havior (New York: Collier Books, 1962), pp. 108—10. 86 "Relatively Inactive" (see Table IV.8). In the following pages the results obtained by the modified version of the Index will be described in simple summary statistics. TABLE IV.8.——Ingham County lawyers distribution of political activity scores No. of Score Respond— Percent of Cumulative Points ents Total Sample Percent 13 10 6.94 6.94 12 17 11.81 18.75 Ve¥Y 11 16 11.11 29.86 Active 10 12 8.33 ‘ , 38.19 (38-19%) "' 55 9 19 13.19 51.38 M°der§t91y 8 19 13.19 64.57 ACtlve 7 14 9.72 74.29 (35-11%) " 52 6 9 6.25 80.54 5 10 6.94 87.48 . 4 9 6.25 93.73 RilatlYely nactive 3 5 3.47 97.20 (25.69%) 2 3 2.08 99.38 1 1 0.69 00.00 _--_31 144 Adjusted Political Activity Index: Results In order to test the thesis that lawyers' political activity varies with variations in their work situation, the writer decided to use the Woodward and Roper Index with the modifications made above. 87 Using the adjusted version of the overall Index dis— cussed, 38.19 percent of Ingham lawyers are found to be Very Active, 36.11 percent Moderately Active, and 25.69 per— cent Relatively Inactive. Tables IV.9—l4 show the distribu— tion of the kinds of activities undertaken by the "Very Active,‘ "Moderately Active" and the "Relatively Inactive" groups. As generally expected, Very Active lawyers tend to vote more frequently than those that are either Moderately Active orthe Inactive. The Very Active have contributed money and effort to aid candidates of their choice to be elected at least once over the past four—year period. They belong to more groups that take a stand on some public is- sues. It is true, however, that these groups are not nec— essarily political. They have written or talked to their CongreSSmen and other public officials about issues of interest to them more than once in the past year and cer— tainly more often than those classified as inactive. The personal style of the very Active seems to set them apart from their inactive colleagues. They have a contentious predisposition and often are not satisfied to be listeners only. Instead, they become involved in discussing political issues and frequently attempt to convince others of their points of View. 88 TABLE IV.9.-—Overall political activity by voting (percentage across) Degree of 3 Times More Than Political Activity or Less 3 Times Totals Inactive 62.16 37.84 100% ' (23) (14) (37) Active 19.23 80.77 100% (10) (42) (52) Very Active 05.45 94.55 100% (3) (52) (55) Total 36 108 *144 TABLE IV.10.—-Overall political activity by discussion of public issues. Degree of Political Frequently Frequently Activity Occasionally & Equal to Convince Tbtals Inactive 78.38 18.92 2.70 100% (29) (7) (1) (37) Active 34.62 38.46 26.92 100% (18) (20) (14) (52) Very Active 16.36 32.73 50.91 100% (9) (18) (28) (55) Total 56 45 43 144 89 TABLE IV.11.—-Overall political activity by belonging to organizations. Degree of Political 2 or Activity None One More Totals Inactive 78.38 16.22 5.41 100% (29) (6) (2) (37) Active 48.08 40.38 11.54 100% (25) (21) (6) (52) Very Active 7.27 36.36 56.36 100% (4) (20) (31) (55) Total 58 47 39 144 TABLE IV.12.—-Overall political activity by times written or talked to legislator or other public officials. Degree of Political Twice Activity None or More Tbtals Inactive 45.95 54.05 100% (17) (20) (37) Active 9.62 90.38 100% (5) (47) (52) Very Active 00.00 100.00 100% (o) (55) (55) TOtal 22 122 144 TABLE IV.13.--Overall political activity and working for the election of candidates in past 4 years. Degree of Political Activity No Yes Totals Inactive 45.95 54.05 100% (17) (20) (37) Active 23.08 76.92 100% (12) (40) (52) Very Active 3.64 96.36 100% (2) (53) (55) Tbtal 31 113 144 TABLE IV.14.-—Overall political activity and money contribu— tions to political candidates. Degree of Political Activity No Yes Totals Inactive 37.84 62.16 100% (14) (23) (37) Active 11.54 88.46 100% (6) (46) (52) Very Active 3.64 96.36 100% (2) (53) (55) Total 22 122 144 91 The relation of lawyers to political parties offers some interesting results.1 In spite of the fact that there is a considerably significant correlation between political activity, as measured by the overall Index, and actual par— ticipation in political parties, there are some differences that are clearly suggested. An inspection of Table IV.15 shows that the overall Index picked up a substantial number of lawyers who admitted no participation in any serious party activities (73.08 percent of those classified as Moderately Active and 14.55 percent of the Very Active). These differences can be accounted for by the fact that the overall Index does not emphasize party action per se as it does other activities. Yet party participation is very much part of the dependent variable that is under examina— tion, political behavior. The differences noted above sug- gest that a good many lawyers have not, of late, belonged 1The political activity of lawyers in political parties was determined on the basis of data gathered by the following question: "Are you involved in any political activities now?" "If 'yes,’ what activities?" All those who claimed to be active were active in party politics. Of those classified as "active in party," 17.36 percent indicated that they are active in party clubs or presently passing petitions around to collect signatures, and as much as 27.08 percent indicated involvement in party hierarchy-- precinct captains, ward chairmen and delegates, etc. The rest, 55.56 percent, admitted no connection with political parties. These were classified as inactive in party. 92 to party clubs or hierarchies and have scarcely partici- pated in the circulation of petitions for judges or party candidates. Yet they seem to vote frequently, belong to both civic and political groups and have learned to use other channels of influence such as letter—writing, per— sonally contacting public officials, and contributing to the political funds of candidates for office. TABLE IV.15.——Overall political activity and participation in political party organization. Degree of Inactive in Active in Political Political Political Activity Parties Parties Tbtals Inactive 91.89 8.11 100% (34) (3) (37) Active 73.08 26.92 100% (38) (14) (52) very Active 14.55 85.45 100% (8) (47) (55) Total 80 64 144 Political Activity and Personal Background Political activity as measured above does not seem to be related to a number of socio—economic factors that often are expected to affect behavior. The writer hypothesized that lawyers coming from less privileged groups or classes 93 will tend to be more active in politics than those from privileged groups. The data on lawyers indicate that back- ground factors such as father's political participation, occupational status, level of education and religion do not in fact affect political activity significantly. The null hypotheses concerning the independence of political activity from each of these socio—economic factors could not be rejected.1 Similarly, the hypotheses that the cor— relation between political activity and each of these variables is zero could not be rejected. The writer ex— pected a strong inverse relationship between the lawyer's political activity and the level of his family income. Here again no significant relationship was found. The one factor that was found significantly correlated to political activity was the lawyer's life cycle. As expected, the results show that political activity of the lawyer declines as he grows older (see Table Iv.l6). An inspection of the results indicate that the lawyer's political activity reaches its apex mostly between the ages of 35—44 and then begins to drOp slowly. It is at this time when the lawyer begins what was termed the stable work stage in his career. lChi square (x2) was not significant at .10 level. See Appendix F. 94 The lawyer's degree of activity declines the older he gets and the more established or stable his practice becomes. TABLE IV.16.——Overall political activity and age. Degree of 7. Political Below 65 and Activity 35 35—44 45—54 55—64 over Tbtal Inactive 38.24 13.21 11.54 64.44 46.15 25.69 (13). (7) (3) (8) (6) (37) Active 26.47 37.74 42.31 38.89 38.46 36.11 (9) (20) (ll) (7) (5) (52) Very Active 35.29 49.06 46.15 16.67 15.38 38.19 ' (12) (26) (12) (3) (2) (55) 23.61 36.81 18.06 12.50 9.03 100.00 (34) (53) (26) (18) (13) (144) I": '.15 p < .05 TWO more aspects in the background of the lawyers in the sample are related to their "interest" in politics now and prior to graduation from law school and their political participation in politics over the past years. It seems that at work lawyers face the realities of life around them and learn What it takes to be successful in this profession. Whatever scruples they may have had are tested here at work and in the early stages of their career in law. At work their early attitudes and ambitions may be reinforced or 95 abandoned. There is evidence that "interest in politics," while it is to develop before graduation, it increases considerably after graduation. Approximately as many as 61 percent indicated "strong" or "some" interest in poli— tics while they were students at law school.1 When asked about their present interest in politics, this figure jumped to as high as 83 percent of the total sample. This increase is illustrated in terms of summary statistics in Thble IV.17. TABLE IV.17.—~Degree of interest in politics before and after graduation. Degree of , Interest Before After in Politics Graduation Graduation No Interest 38.89 16.67 (56) (24) Some Interest . 29.86 29.17 (43) (42) Strong Interest 31.25 54.17 (45) (78) Total 100.00 100.00 (144) (144) 1The degree of interest in politics was determined by two direct questions (28 and 28a) with the degrees of interest to be checked by the respondents. 96 The reasons for limited interest at school, as suggested by a few lawyers who volunteered to speak on this point, is due to the preoccupation of the respondents with studying for their degrees, allowing little or no time to be inter— ested in politics. Further, it may be appropriate to indicate that the meaning of interest in politics at law school may be considerably different than interest in politics now. The difference in meaning may derive from the differences in ecology of a law student's life and that of practice and making a living. Interest in politics now seems closer to being "concretized" or real mostly because it is possible for respondents to relate "politics" to the making of a successful career in life. They are, as it were, in the midst of it whether they like it or not. Students' interest would remain less real at law school because "politics" is much more remote from him than it is when he is in practice. Thus the greater interest lawyers express gay indicates that the "work situation" plays a considerable role in the politicization of lawyers.1 1A similar conclusion is reached by M. N. Goldstein in his Ph.D. dissertation, "Political Involvement Among American Law Students" (unpublished, Department of Political Science, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N.C., 1964), p. 220. 97 The political activity implies, among other things, a measure of interest in politics and that political ac— tivity increases with increases in the degree of interest. This logic is found true in fact. There is a strong cor— relation between political activity as measured by the overall activity Index described above and the degree of "interest in politics now." Almost half (48.72 percent) of those indicating "strong" interest now are found actual— ly very active in politics gay and more than half (55 per— cent) active specifically in local party organization (see Tables IV.18 and IV.19).l There was no correlation between overall political activity and the degree of interest in politics at law school. The majority (64.58 percent) of lawyers in the sample have had some political experience particularly at the state and local levels. The index used to measure political ac— tivity indicates that as much as 80 percent of those who were found very active have held a political office of one kind or another, including party offices (see Table IV.20). In Chapter V the writer will discuss the kinds of offices held and also the relationship of the lawyer's work situa- tion to holding political office. 1These results may also indicate the need for a more adequate measure of political activity. 98 TABLE IV.18.--Overall political activity and "interest in politics now." Degree of Political No Some Strong Activity Interest Interest Interest Total Inactive 50.00 28.57 16.67 (12) (12) (13) 37 Active 37.50 38.10 34.62 ( 9) (16) (27) 52 Very Active 12.50 33.33 48.72 (3) (14) (38) 55 16.67 29.17 54.17 (24) (42) (78) 144 r = .31 p< .001 TABLE IV.19.-—Participation in party organization and "interest in politics now." Party No Some Strong Participation Interest Interest Interest Total Inactive 79.17 61.90 44.87 (19) (26) (35) 80 Active 20.83 38.10 55.13 ( 5) (16) (43) 64 16.67 29.17 54.17 (24) (42) (78) 144 r = .26 p4 .001 99 TABLE IV.20.—-Overall political activity of lawyers and whether they held political office. Degree of Have Not Held Have Held Political Political Political Activity Office Office Tbtal Inactive 51.35 48.65 (19) (18) 37 Active 40.38 59.62 (21) (31) 52 Very Active 20.00 80.00 (11) (44) 55 35.42 64.58 (51) (93) 144 r = .24 p <1.001 In this chapter the writer discussed the political and socio—economic context in which lawyers in the sample operate. Ingham County seems to be a unique place for a fairly successful legal practice in that it provides con— siderable opportunities. Members of the Ingham County bar come primarily from well—recognized law schools. They come from social backgrounds in which no particular class is predominant. Nevertheless, the majority come from white Anglo—Saxon Protestant stock. The lawyers in the county have generally been ac- tive in local politics. Almost two—thirds of the lawyers in 100 the county have held some political office at one point or another in their careers.' This fact in itself indicates that these lawyers and the context within which they prac— tice is not typical of others practicing in cities of the same size. A preliminary investigation of the hypothesis that there must be significant relationship between political activity and social background factors was rejected. The data show, nevertheless, that political activity is inverse- ly correlated with age and directly related to interest in politics now. Further, with regard to interest in politics, the data indicate that it increases considerably after law- yers enter practice. CHAPTER V WORK SITUATION AND POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF LAWYERS One conclusion reached in the preceding chapter was that the interest of lawyers in politics increases after graduation and upon entrance into practice and that the political activity of lawyers is generally independent of their social background. This finding makes the investiga— tion of work situation the more important and necessary. The following pages are devoted to doing that. The major hypothesis in this study is concerned with finding out whether variation in the political activity of lawyers is related to variation in their work situation and position in the hierarchy of the profession. In more specific terms, this hypothesis considered here may be stated as follows: the general political activity of law— yers is inversely related to their work situation and posi— tion in the hierarchy of the profession. Thus lawyers in low-status work situations will tend to be more active in politics than those who are in high-status work situations. lOl 102 This hypothesis was formulated on the basis of the litera- ture discussed in Chapters I, II and III. The research find— ings indicate that the hypothesis as formulated does not hold entirely true for the members of Ingham Bar. In the following pages this writer will discuss the reasons why it does not by examining both the degree and kinds of activi- ties in which Ingham lawyers engage. Yet before going to any length, it is necessary to define what is meant by work situation and how this concept was actually operationalized. Work Situation Defined In Chapter IV most of the elements that contribute to the definition of work situation were discussed. Here work situation is the major composite concept that requires definition and operationalization. Table v.1 shows the simple correlation matrix of the elements that define work situation. The internal correlations are not always signifi— cant, yet they help summarize the relationships of these elements to each other. These elements or factors include the lawyer's type of practice (whether on his own, employed, or a partner in a firm or group). If he operates in partner- ship, the number of members (size of firm) becomes a note- worthy factor. The stage of practice, i.e., whether the lawyer is in the initial or the transitional stage of his 103 TABLE V.l.-—Simple correlation matrix--elements of work situation 4 6 3O 33 34 40 4 1.00 .133 .293 —.056 .143 -.l75 6 1.000 .336 .068 .162 —.005 30 1.000 .247 —.035 —.O95 33 1.000 -.055 -.121 34 1.000 .158 40 1.000 This Correlation Matrix shows the cross—correlations of: years in practice (4), size of firm (6), income (30), type of practice or work setting (33), type of cases mostly handled (34), and full—time or part-time practice (40). career or in the more stable stage, is an important factor that enters into the definition of work situation. Income is also included. Two other indicators connected with the lawyers‘ work conditions are: whether he is in full-time or part-time and whether he handles mostly domestic or business— corporate-commercial.cases. The former includes personal injury, divorce, criminal, inheritance and labor cases. The latter includes will—probate—estate, real estate and cases involving business, insurance companies, industrial concerns and the like. A system of weights was assigned, the sum of 104 which determined the general hierarchy (or the status) of the work situations of Ingham lawyers (see Table V2). Using these indices in the manner indicated, this writer was able to classify Ingham lawyers into three categories that define their relative positions. Thus lawyers receiving a score of 8 points or less were classified in the "Low—status Work Situation” category (32.64 percent); 9—12 points in the "Middle—status work Situation" (34.03 percent); and those receiving 13—19 points in the ”High—status Work situation" (33.33 percent). In the following paragraphs an attempt is made to describe in a general manner the characteristics of members of these categories. TABLE V.2.—-Distribution of lawyers by work situation factors Percent— Score age No. A. Type of practice Solo 1 49.31 71 Associate (or employed by other lawyer) l 10.42 15 Firm of 2 partners 2 4.17 6 Firm of 3-4 3 21.53 31 Firm of 5 or more 4 14.58 21 B. Years in practice 5 years or less 1 23.61 34 6—10 years 2 20.83 30 11—15 years 3 20.14 29 16-20 years 4 5.56 8 21—25 years 5 7.64 11 26 and over 6 22.22 32 105 TABLE V.2——Continued Percent- Score age No. C. Income (thousands of dollars) NA - 6.94 10 Less than 10 1 18.75 27 10-14 2 19.44 28 15-19 3 20.14 29 20-24 4 11.81 17 25-29 5 9.72 14 30—34 6 4.17 6 35 and over 7 9.03 13 D. Full-time practice Yes 1 88.19 127 No 0 11.81 17 E: Type of cases handled Domestic l 57.64 83 Business 2 48.36 61 Final status categories Low work situation 4- 8 32.64 47 Middle work situation 9—12 34.03 49 High work situation 13—19 33.33 48 100.00 144 Work Situation and Type of Practice In large metropolitan centers the differaices in work settings or type of practice alone tend to significant- ly determine the position of the lawyer in the hierarchy of the profession. There is evidence that this holds true in a 106 less metropolitan community such as Ingham, but not to the same extent. Theimpression received from the literature is that almost all or the majority of lawyers in solo practice are in the lower echelons of the profession. Assessing the status of lawyers' work situation in the manner described above indicates that 40.85 percent of those in solo practice and as much as 6.9 percent of those in firms are in low- status work situations (see Table v.3).l Considerable dif— ferences appear in the higher echelons. In the high-status work situation category there are only 21.13 percent of solo lawyers, whereas there are as much as 56.90 percent of those in firms. Almost all of those who are associates or employed are in low-status work situations. Further, Table v.4 shows in greater detail the distribution of members of firms of different sizes by the level of their work situation. It indicates rather clearly the function of the size of the partnership on the position of the member lawyers in the hierardhy of the profession. l The members of firms who are in low-status work situation include two lawyers from two-member firms and two 3—4 member firms. 107 TABLE v.3.--Work situation by type of practice Status of Work Firm Situation Solos Associates Members Totals Low 40.85 93.33 6.90 32.64 (29) (14) (4) (47) Middle 38.03 6.67 36.21 34.03 (27) (l) (21) (49) High 21.13 0.00 56.90 33.33 (15) (0) (33) (48) 49.31 10.42 40.28 100.0 (71) (15) (58) (144) r = .39 p (.001 TABLE v.4.--Work situation by size of firm Status of Work 2 3—4 5—6 7—8 Situation Members Members Members Members Totals Low 33.33 6.45 0.00 0.00 6.90 (2) (2) (0) (0) (4) Middle 33.33 48.39 28.57 14.29 36.21 (2) (15) (2) (2) (21) High 33.33 45.42 71.43 85.71 56.90 (2) (l4) (5) (12) (33) 10.34 53.45 12.07 24.14 100.00 (6) (31) (7) (14) (58) r = .41 p<.001 108 Work situation and Career Staga§_ The work stage in the lawyer's career is an essen— tial factor used in determining the level of his work situa- tion. In Chapter Iv it was shown that the more stable law— yers become in their work situation, the higher income they will earn (see Table IV.1). Here, the writer is interested in showing the distribution of lawyers in different career stages by their work situation level. Table v.5 indicates that a lawyer's work situation will tend to improve rather continuously the longer he remains in practice. Table v.6 shows in a similar fashion how lawyers with different in— comes are distributed by.work situation status. TABLE V.5.—-Status of work situation by years in practice (or work stage) Initial Work Transitional Status of Stage Work Stage Stable Work Stage Total Work 1-5 6-10 11—15 16—20 21-25 25 or Situation Years Years Years Years Years More Low 91.17 40.00 13.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 47 (31) (12) (4) (0) (0) (0) Middle 8.83 43.33 57.72 62.50 27.27 31.25 49 (3) (13) (15) (5) (3) (10) High 0.00 16.67 38.48 37.50 72.73 68.75 48 (0) (5) (10) (3) (8) (22) 23.61 20.83 20.14 5.56 7.64 21.78 144 (34) (30) (29) (8) (ll) (32) r = .69 p< .001 109 TABLE V.6.—-Status of work situation by income (in thousands of dollars) Status of Work Low Middle High Situa— Under 30 $ tion N.A. 10 lO—l4 15-19 20—24 25—29 over Total Low 20.00 81.48 46.43 27.59 11.76 0.00 0.00 47 (2) (22) (13) (8) (2) (0) (0) Middle 50.00 11.11 46.43 51.72 41.18 28.57 10.53 49 (5) (3) (13) (15) (7) (4) (2) High 30.00 7.41 7.14 20.69 47.06 71.43 89.47 48 (3) (2) (2) (6) (8) (10) (13) 6.94 18.75 19.44 20.14 11.81 9.72 13.20 (10) (27) (28) (29) (l7) (l4) (l9) r = .58 p <..001 Work Situation and Type of Cases Mostly Handled by Lawyers The distribution of lawyers handling different types of cases by the level of their work situation shows that as much as 47 percent of those handling domestic cases are in low-status work situations, whereas only 13.11 percent of those handling business cases are in this same status (see Table v.7). In Chapter Iv it was shown that the differences in income between those handling domestic and business cases, though existent, were not terribly large for the Ingham Bar. The differences in the position of those handling different 110 types of cases are present, but again not to the same extent as the case may be in a larger metropolitan center. TABLE V.7.-—Status of work situation by type of cases handled Status of Work Domestic Business— Situation Relations Corporate Totals Low 46.99 13.11 32.64 (39) (8) (47) Middle 36.14 31.15 34.03 (30) (19) (49) High 9.72 55.74 33.33 (14) (34) (48) 57.64 42.36 100.00 (83) (61) (144) r = .44 p < .001 In sum, it is possible to conclude that the determin— ation of the position of lawyers in the hierarchy of the Ingham Bar by means of the classification scheme suggested in Table v.1 above is relatively adequate for the purpose of this study. It helps in pointing out differences between the three levels of work situation in a systematic manner. It takes into account several factors that affect the work situation of lawyers rather than only one or two. Further— more, it is possible to reproduce easily. 111 It may be interesting to indicate that the majority of those lawyers classified in the high-status work situa- tion category have received high "ratings" by the Martindale and Hubble legal directory. The editors of the latter docu- mentary publication have assigned ratings of "A," "B," "C,” and "No Mention" to lawyers all over the country. These ratings are given on the basis of vague criteria, the most important of which are "years in practice," "estimate of worth," and possibly community relations and competence.1 Table v.8 shows the relationship between work situation and Martindale's ratings. The higher the work situation of the lawyer the greater the chances of receiving mention or a rating. Of those who are in low—status work situation as much as 87.23 percent received no mention, whereas only 35.42 percent of those in high-status work situation re- ceived this rating. Finally, the differences in the social backgrounds between lawyers in low—status and high-status work situation often observed in large metropolitan centers are not signifi- cant in the Ingham Bar° No significant relationship was It is not very clear how these ratings were arrived at. It is possible that Martindale‘s editors ask the help of certain local community people for designating the compe— tent and well-thought-of lawyers. 112 found between the level of lawyers' work situation and the social class they come from. As was indicated earlier in Chapter IV, a very small percentage of the lawyers are second-generation Americans and a much smaller percentage belong to ethnic groups. Further, there was no significant relationship between the lawyer's work situation and the quality of his education (law schools attended). Needless to say, the hypotheses concerning social background and edu— cation cannot be adequately tested except in large metropoli— tan centers where heterogeneous backgrounds are more avail- able than in the Ingham area. TABLE V.8.--Work situation by Martindale's rating (percent across) Status of Work No Situation Mention "C" ”B" "A" Total Low 87.23 10.64 0.00 2.13 100.00 (41) (5) (0) (l) (47) Middle 44.90 36.73 14.29 4.08 100.00 (22) (18) (7) (2) (49) High 35.42 10.42 29.17 25.00 100.00 (17) (5) (14) (12) (48) 55.56 19.44 14.58 10.42 (80) (28) (21) (15) (144) r = .50 p<.001 113 The Work Situation of Lawyers and the Degree and Kinds of Political Participation Variation in the degree of political activity of law— yers does not seem to be entirely related to variation in their work situation. Overall activity, as measured in this study, does not seem to be inversely related to work situa- tion as was expected in an earlier chapter. The correlation is not significantly greater than zero and hence the null hypothesis cannot be rejected. Summary statistics (Table v.9) show that over 77 percent of those in high-status work situa- tion are either moderately active or very active compared to 74 percent of those in lower-status work situation. These differences in percentages, although very small, may suggest that the relationship between work situation and degree of political activity is really direct rather than inverse, as the writer hypothesized. Yet such a conclusion cannot be made on the basis of these data alone. In order to explain these results, it is necessary to investigate the modes or kinds of activities in which these lawyers participate. Dif- ferences in work situation were found to be significantly related to differences in the kinds of activities in which different lawyers engage. However, before proceeding further, it must be pointed out that Ingham lawyers have an impressive history of political involvement which in itself 114 is revealing of the nature of the relationship of lawyers to politics. The political experience of the majority of these lawyers may also help in explaining the differences in the degree and kinds of political activities in which lawyers in different work situations engage. TABLE V.9.--Degree of overall political activity by status of work situation —_‘ ~ Overall Activity Low Middle High Total Inactive 25.53 28.57 22.92 25.69 (12) (14) (11) (37) Active 34.04 34.69 39.58 36.11 (16) (l7) (19) (52) Very Active 40.43 36.73 37.50 38.19 (19) (18) (18) (55) 32.64 34.03 33.33 100.00 (47) (49) (48) (144) r = $0001 Ingham lawyers seem to have had political background and experiences that set them apart from other lawyers prac- ticing elsewhere. It was indicated earlier that as much as 64.58 percent of Ingham lawyers have held a political office of some kind or another. It was also found that 80 percent of those who held office are presently very active in politics. 115 It is important to indicate at this point that as much as 62.50 percent of those who are now found in high—status work situations have held political offices. The summary statis- tics described in Table v.10 indicate that most of the offi— ces that were held by these lawyers were law-enforcement offices at the city and county levels. Both the fact that a majority of the lawyers in high-status work situations have held political offices and that they have held local and law- enforcement offices suggest that both political experience and holding local offices are frequently perceived by law- yers as necessary for an improved work situation. This con- clusion becomes more acceptable in the light of the fact that a majority (53 percent) of those who are now in low- status work situations strongly desire to hold offices most— ly at the local level, i.e., city and county attorney and local judgeships. These offices are very much the same as the offices that were held by those who are now in high— status work situations. Obviously it is possible to infer that these offices have been instrumental in improving the work situation of those who are now in the upper echelons of the profession. These offices also serve as stepping—stones for higher political offices. Similar conclusions were arrived at by Professor J. Schlesinger on the basis of his study of governors. This political scientist suggested also 116 0000304 EmnvcH A0040 A00 A00 1000 A00 A00 A040 100 0040 1400 00.004 00.4 00.0 00.04 00.0 04.0 04.04 04.0 00.04 00.00 0000 A40 A00 A040 000 000 A00 A00 400 0040 00.00 00.0 04.0 04.00 00.0 00.0 00.04 04.0 04.0 00.00 004m 0000 A40 A40 A00 A00 000 A00 000 A00 0040 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.04 00.04 04.0 04.0 04.0 00.04 00.00 040042 A000 000 A00 A00 100 400 A00 A00 A00 0040 00.00 00.0 40.0 00.04 00.0 00.0 04.04 40.0 00.04 00.00 304 40008 .04004 004000 mnumom 00050 .0000 .0000 .0000 004000 0soz 0040 00000 .0000 00000 00 40000 .0000 .0000 0040 00000 0400 100040 00000 04 000000 .0000 0003 00 Hwnfimz 0d0m0m 0 0 4 0 0 o 4 0 0 4 0 4 4 0 0 4 0 0 “HI iuui “j E 00 0400 0000 400404400 0004 00 004000400040 00 004000040 0003 00 0000001u.04.> 04000 117 that lawyers derive their advantage over non—lawyers in poli- tics from legal skills that qualify them best to hold these law-enforcement offices at the local levels. He observed further that, in fact, lawyers are "becoming increasingly dependent on a law enforcement office as a means for politi- cal advancement.”l Thus the slight differences in the degree of politi- cal activity of lawyers in low-status and high-status work situations are partly due to the fact that the majority of those who are in high-status work situations have held offi— ces at the local level and, as will be noted later, are less interested in offices at this level. Nevertheless, the polit— ical experience of those in high-status work situations—— friendships and access—-enables them to engage in politics of bargaining and influence more frequently than those in the lower echelons of Ingham Bar. The discussion below of the different channels used by lawyers at different levels is hoped to clarify this reasoning. Politics of Hierarchy and Politics of Bargaining The kinds of political activities in which lawyers engage and which were assessed by the overall adjusted index 1 Schlesinger, op. cit., p. 33. 118 may be classified into two major categories or types. The first type, politics of hierarchy, includes a considerable measure of combativeness, contention and opportunities for exposure. Politics of hierarchy, as used here, includes mostly participation in political party organization and activities and participation in other civic and voluntary political organizations. The second type, politics of bar— gaining, includes the use of certain channels of influence such as voting, letter—writing and money contribution to political candidates. In politics of hierarchy the emphasis is on the search for channels of patronage, political ad— vancement and establishing business contacts by increased exposure in specific publics or the community at large. In contrast, politics of bargaining emphasizes efforts toward making claims on public officials or legislators, claims, however, that do not necessarily lead to holding office as mudh as influencing the outcome of certain decisions re— garding specific persons or issues. As was hypothesized in Chapter III, lawyers in low- status work situations are actually more active in political party hierarchies and auxiliary activities than are lawyers in high-status work situations (see Table V.ll). Further- more, lawyers in low-status work situations tend to belong 119 to more organizations that take stands on public issues than those in high-status work situations (see Table v.12). It thus appears that when lawyers are in low—status work situa— tions, they tend to perceive political party activities and membership in local organizations as possible vehicles for advancement more often than those in high—status work situa- tions. This becomes even more clarified when participation in political parties is cross-correlated with work stages. Table v.13 indicates that as lawyers reach the more stable stage of their career they become less active in political parties as such. TABLE V.ll.-—Participation in political parties and status of work situation Degree of Political Activity Low Middle High Totals Inactive 44.68 57.14 64.58 55.56 (21) (28) (31) (80) Active 55.32 42.86 35.42 44.44 (26) (21) (17) (64) 32.64 34.03 33.33 100.00 (47) (49) (48) (144) r =— --.16 p (.05 120 TABLE V.lZ.--Status of work situation by number of organiza- tions belonged to Status of Work Situation None One Two or More Total Low 22.41 44.68 33.33 33.33 (13) (21) (13) (47) Middle 32.76 31.91 38.46 34.03 (19) (15) (15) (49) High 44.83 23.40 28.21 32.64 (26) (ll) (11) (48) 40.28 32.64 27.08 (58) (47) (39) (144) r = —.16 p‘fifOS TABLE V.l3.—-Political party participation and work stages 4‘ J ._._L Participation Initial Transitional Stable in Parties Stage Stage Stage Total Not Active 44.12 49.24 78.43 55.56 (15) (40) (80) Active 55.88 50.76 21.57 44.44 (19) (ll) (64) 23.51 40.97 35.42 100.00 (34) (51) (144) r = —.30 p<.001 121 Political parties and party activities seem to be the logical place in which lawyers could engage, especially for those who are in low—status work situations and who are determined to advance. If they were seeking a political career, it is important to prove their fidelity to the party as a first step toward political advancement. Similarly, if they were interested in increasing their legal business by establishing contacts and becoming known, participation in party activities offers considerable opportunities. In political party circles, these lawyers can get to know local political leaders, local judges, public officials and law enforcement people both formally and informally. Community organizations, civic and business, provide excellent opportunities for lawyers to make contacts in the hope of improving the quality of their clientele and possi— bly for soliciting more business. In Lansing, the most im— portant local community organization is the Young Republican Club. This club has been the major extra-party organization to which Republican lawyers belong. This club is well- recognized by other established lawyers in the area. Law— yers in the initial stages of their career and those who have newly arrived in the community soon learn about this club. One Democratic lawyer who has just recently moved to Lansing admitted considering joining this club. ”In the 122 past I was a strong Democrat," he said, "but now I call my- self an independent, but really I am not that at all. . . . In this Republican town I probably have to join the Young Republicans to get anywhere." It may be that in fact the club does not offer a great deal, but it certainly is per- ceived as the place to be "to get anywhere.” Membership in other organizations as well as participation in political party organizations provide lawyers face-to-face contacts with people and exposure in lieu of advertising to which law- yers must not resort. Lawyers in high—status work situations in the Lan— sing area seem to be more active in politics of bargaining, discussion and influence than lawyers in low-status work situations. This is indicated by the fact that they tend to make use of at least three channels of influence more fre- quently than those in low-status work situations. These channels are: (1) writing and talking to legislators and other public officials about matters of interest to them; (2) making money contributions to the funds of political candidates; and (3) voting (i.e., frequency of going to the polls). The latter "channel" of influence may also indicate the extent to which lawyers in high-status work situations take their "civic" responsibility seriously. Table v.14 shows a direct relationship between work 123 situation and the extent to which lawyers write and talk to legislators and public officials. The higher the work situa- tion level, the greater the tendency to use these channels of influence. Almost 94 percent of those who are presently in high-status work situations have written or talked to public officials twice or more in the past year as compared to 74.5 percent of those in low—status work situations. Similarly, lawyers in high-status work situations are found to lead others in lower-status work situations in making money contributions to the funds of political candidates (see Table v.15). Apparently lawyers in high—status work situations tend to perceive these kinds of participation as more suited to their purposes than participation in party organization as activists or officeéholders. TABLE V.l4.--Times written or talked to legislators and public officials by status of work situation 1 = m NUmber of Times in Last Year Low Middle High. Total Less than once 25.53 14.29 6.25 15.28 (12) (7) (3) (22) Twice or more 74.47 85.71 93.75 84.72 (35) (42) (45) (122) 32.64 34.03 33.33 100.00 (47) (49) (48) (144) r = .22 p4 .001 124 TABLE V.15.—0Money contribution and status of work situation M ====== Contributed Money Low Middle High Total No 17.02 24.49 4.17 15.28 (8) (12) (2) (22) Yes 82.98 75.51 95.83 84.72 (39) (37) (46) (122) 32.64 34.03 33.33 100.00 (47) (49) (48) (144) r = .15 p (..05 Lawyers in high-status work situations, as indicated earlier, are often lawyers who have reached the stable stage in their legal career and have already had considerable political experience at least at the local level. Talking and writing to legislators and public officials is particu- larly facilitated by the numerous points of access provided by the fact that Lansing is the center for a considerable amount of political activity. Again, it would seem that the political experience of those who are now in high—status work situations is particularly helpful in facilitating in- formal communications between these lawyers and public offi- cials. Further, it may be pointed out that in some cases the assistance of some of these lawyers is requested by .--- a '\ \ 125 legislators and other public officials.1 In one instance one of the largest firms (eight members) was "talking poli— tics" to almost everyone and actually handling the organiza— tion of the local campaign for a presidential candidate. This is also a single example of how informal political con— tacts may result in a lucrative business deal. It may be interesting to know the nature of the con- tents of communications between these lawyers and legislators and public officials. The writer assumes that these lawyers, by talking and writing to legislators and public officials, attempt to communicate their interest or the interest of their clients regarding the resolution of certain specific issues or the outcome of specific issues. One lawyer inter— viewed by the writer suggested that some lawyers perform a linkage function between the people and the government. Drawing on his experience, he indicated that many people come to him asking for help to contact and talk to public officials and sometimes legislators on their behalf.2 Other researchers interested in this specific aspect may shed lOne lawyer indicated that his client (M,S.U.) asked him to help in the establishment of an.M.S.U. mission to Saigon early in the rule of Diem. He boasted of his politi— cal contacts. This lawyer showed considerable sophistication when he spoke of the role of lawyers in the community. 126 further light on the function of lawyers as an intermediary agent between individuals and groups on one hand and politi- cal decision-makers on the other. Similarly, further inves- tigation of the use of "money contributions" is required before anything can be said concerning this kind of parti- cipation in politics. The most that can be suggested here is that money contributions to political candidates are made by lawyers to obtain a measure of access and, more important perhaps, to assure party regulars of their fidelity to the party. Lawyers in high—status work situations tend to vote more often than lawyers in low-status work situations. Table v.16 shows that as much as 38 percent of those who voted three times or more come from the ranks of those who are in high—status work situations. In addition, the ten- dency to vote increases with the level of work situation. Lawyers in high-status work situations seem to take their "civic" responsibility more seriously than those in lower— status situations. It is possible also that some of those in low-status work situations may not consider voting as a particularly effective channel of influence and hence do not take it seriously. . — u 0!. - - _ - .- -_ J . — ' . -.- - - . . . . . . _ .i ‘ ' J - I - -. I. . I. _ ' . ....— . ’ ' I - -_- I‘ - y . '- _ . . . I. - ‘ _ J . ._ . n ' - ~ I - 127 TABLE V.l6.--Status of work situation by number of times voted in the last four years #5 Status of Work Less Than 3 Times Total Situation 3 Times or More Low 41.66 29.63 32.64 (15) (32) (47) .Middle 38.88 32.41 34.03 (14) (35) (49) High 19.46 37.96 33.33 (7) (41) (48) 25.00 75.00 100.00 (36) (108) (144) r = .15 p(.05 Work Situation of Lawyers and the Value They Attach to Holding Political Office It was hypothesized in Chapter III that lawyers in low—status work situations will tend to attach higher value to the rewards of holding public office than do lawyers in higher-status work situations. As it will be indicated be- low, this reasoning is substantiated by empirical evidence. It is, however, necessary at this point to explain how law- yers' evaluation of the utility of political rewards was de- termined. The utility of political rewards could be assessed by determining, roughly, the value lawyers attach to holding 128 different political offices. The lawyers were asked to eval— uate a series of public offices (at the local, state, and national levels) in terms of their desire or interest in holding eadh of these offices. Each lawyer was asked to in— dicate the degree of his interest by putting a check-mark on a six-point continuum which ranged from "very much interested” at one end to ”not interested at all" at the other (see Figure v.1).l A general overall score was obtained by add- ing the points in cumulative total. The resulting index is a rough estimate of the lawyers' personal evaluation and in— terest in holding political office. Lawyers with the lowest score points (36.81 percent) were considered to attach "high" value to the utility of holding office; those in the middle (31.94 percent) attach "moderate" value; and those with the highest score points (31.25 percent) attach ”low" value. Figure V.l.-—Continuum of interest in holding office of U.S. Congressman Very Much Not at All Interested Interested Z / / / / 1 2 3 4 5 6 1See the detailed format of Question 30 in Appendix B. The lawyers were handed a yellow sheet on which the offices were enumerated each on six—point continuum. The question directly following was concerned with whether the Respondent ‘would "consider or be seriously interested in" any of the 'enumerated political offices and if “yes" which one (see Table V.20) . 129 As hypothesized, lawyers in low-status work situa- tions tended to attach higher value to holding political office than did lawyers in higher—status work situations. Table V.l7 shows that 51.11 percent of those who attach "high" value to holding political office come from the ranks of those who are in the lower echelons of the profession versus only 13.13 percent from those in the top. TABLE V.l7.-—Status of work situation and value attached to holding office W Status of Work Low Moderate High Situation Value Value Value Total Low 20.75 28.26 51.11 32.64 (ll) (13) (23) (47) Middle 37.74 28.26 35.56 34.03 (20) (13) (16) (49) High 41.50 43.48 13.13 33.33 (22) (20) (6) (48) 36.81 31.94 31.25 100.00 (53) (46) (45) (144) r -.29 p<.001 One might reasonably expect lawyers who attach high value to holding political office (in this case 51.11 per- cent of those in low-status work situations) to be very ac- tive in politics. It does in fact hold true. Almost 58 130 percent of those who attach high value to holding political office are found to be very active in politics (see Table V418). On the basis of these facts it is possible to con- clude that the lawyer's work situation and position in the hierarchy of the profession seem to cause to a considerable extent both a high evaluation of the rewards of holding political office and active participation in politics. That is, in spite of the absence of any significant statistical relationship between overall political activity and work situation. TABLE V. 18.-—0verall political activity and the value lawyers attach to political rewards Degree of Political Low Moderate High Activity Value Value Value Total Inactive 32.08 23.91 20.00 37 (17) (11) (9) Active 39.62 45.65 22.22 52 (21) (21) (10) Very Active 28.30 30.43 57.78 55 (15) (14) (26) 36.81 31.94 31.25 144 (53) (46) (45) r= .21 p< .05 131 Lawyers' Work Situation and the ‘.Kinds of Offices That Will Be Seriously Considered The rewards of holding public office seem to be par- ticularly attractive to members of the Bar perhaps more than members of any other profession. This explains in part the relation of lawyers to politics. Especially at the state and local levels, lawyers can hold political office and at the same time maintain their legal practice. The data gathered here indicate that more than 72 percent of the law- yers in Ingham County would seriously consider holding cer- tain political offices, especially at the local and state levels. Further investigation indicates there is a signifi- cant relationship between the 1awyers' work situation and the level of the offices that would be considered. Table V.l9 shows that 80 percent of lawyers in low—status work situations are willing to consider offices at the state and local levels in contrast to 25.81 percent of those in high— status work situations. Lawyers in high—status work situa— tions are willing to consider mostly offices at the federal level. 1It probably should be pointed out that many of those in high-status work situations hesitated very much when asked to indicate which political office they would consider seriously. Many said that they will consider a given office when it is offered. 132 TABLE V.l9.—-Level of offices which would be considered by Status of work situation Level of Office Low Middle High Total Local and State 80.00 60.00 25.81 57.55 (32) (21) (8) (61) Federal 20.00 40.00 74.19 42.45 (8) (14) (23) (45) 37.74 33.02 29.25 100.00 (40) (35) (31) (106) r = .44 p<.OOl It was indicated earlier that over 60 percent of those in high~status work situations have already held a political office sometime in the past and subsequently went back to legal practice. This would seem to limit their am- bitions at the local and state levels. These offices seem to be desired by lawyers who find themselves in low—status work situations and who may be desiring to walk in the paths already trod by a majority of those who are now in high- status work situations. These offices may also serve as stepping-stones for higher political offices and especially for those who are interested in political advancement or a political career. Table v.20 shows in greater detail the ¥ . i A _, . . _, ; - - . ..4 ~ A ‘ l k v n . a . 133 Awwav imav Amac Ame .xov Ammo x61 xomv Ammo. oo.ooa om.NH om.ma mm.® mm.o mo.wa ha.v mm.ma mm.om xmvv “my Amav Ame Ame Ame lav Ame Away mm.mm m¢.oa mo.hm N¢.oa mm.o mm.o mo.m 5H.¢ «w.mm swam lave Ame Ame Ame inc Amav Awe lav Avav mo.vm mm.ma ma.o hm.ma HH.HH nh.om oa.m vo.m hm.mm maopaz Anal Awe Ame Ame Awe Ame Adv Asav any gm.mm Hm.m om.v mm.¢ nh.ma mo.ha mH.N ha.mm mm.¢a 304 Hmuoa mmUSb .mcoo .GflEfifi .mammq mmUDb .mpu¢ .mpufi Hmpamnoo coapmsuam .Umm .m.D .pmm w mumum vapm mpMpm mpssoo uoc pa903_ xnoz mumum o amooq w mpfio mo msumum H m p H m c o O U a s 0.3 coaumsuam xnoz mo msumum >9 hamsoaumm pmnmpamnoo mmUHmmo mo GOHpDQHHpmHQII»ON.> mamma 134 kinds of offices that would be considered by lawyers in dif- ferent work situations. The offices desired by those in low— status work situations are mostly law-enforcement offices at the city and county levels, whereas lawyers in high-status work situations would consider mostly positions sudh as Congressman. In Chapter VI the writer will discuss how different lawyers perceive the utility of political reward, i.e., in what terms. Other Aspects of Lawyers"WOrk Situation and Political Activity: Before concluding this chapter, an attempt will be made to investigate the relationships between two specific aspects of work situation and political participation. These selected aspects are work—history and the type of cases handled. These aspects of the lawyer's work situation should be examined more thoroughly than is possible in this study. Work History and Political Activity In Chapter III the possible relation between work history and political participation was referred to briefly. As defined earlier, work history refers to conditions sur- rounding the lawyer's passage from one stage to another in 135 his career. Smooth and orderly passage from one stage to another, it was hypothesized, leads to easy entry into high positions in the lawyer's career. There is evidence to this effect in the data collected in this study (see Table v.21). Lawyers who went "directly into practice" and had a relative— ly easy entry into practice are found, for the most part, in relatively higher work situations than those who had to go into other employments partly because of the difficulty of hanging out their own ”shingle.” TABLE v.21.—-Status of Work situation by work history Status of A Work Assumed Other Directly to Situation Employment Practice Total Low 41.10 23.94 32.64 (30) (17) (47) Middle 30.14 38.03 34.03 (22) (27) (49) High 28.77 38.03 33.33 (21) (27) (48) 50.69 49.31 100.00 (73) (71) (144) r = .16 p<.05 136 More important at this point is the assumption that difficulties encountered after graduation might produce the kind of person who learns to appreciate politics as a possi- ble means for advancement and hence political participation. Table v.22 indicates the validity of this reasoning. Law- yers who assumed other employment before going into prac- tice are found in fact to be more active than those who had relatively easy or direct entry into practice. TABLE v.22.-4Work history by overall political activity W ‘Work Moderately Very History Inactive Active Active Total Directly to Practice 56.76 57.69 36.36 49.31 (21) (30) (20) (71) Assumed Other Employment 43.24 42.31 63.64 50.69 (16) (22) (35) (73) (37) (52) (55) (144) r= .17 p<.05 137 Type of Cases Handled and Political Activity A very important aspect of work situation and a con- siderable factor in determining the position of the lawyer in the hierarchy of the profession is the type of cases he handles most (see Table v.7 above). The amount of "legal specialization" could not be studied in Ingham County be- cause those who are specialized are extremely few. The near- est thing to specialization was determined by the ”type of cases handled most" by the lawyer. The type of cases handled most proved to be adequate for the purpose of this study. This variable helps clarify the kind and quality of clients with whom the lawyer deals. Lawyers handling mostly domestic and personal injury cases deal with generally poor clients and people with special problems arising from divorces, assaults, crime, labor and some wills. Lawyers handling mostly business cases deal generally with rich and steady clients. They represent mostly defendants rather than plaintiffs and therefore handle mostly cases involving business, industrial corporations and utilities in the area. They also handle a mixture of cases arising from wills and estates and real estate. The data collected in this study indicate a close relationship between the type of cases mostly handled by the lawyer and his political activity. 138 As expected, lawyers handling mostly domestic cases tend to be more active in local party organizations and auxiliaries than do those handling mostly business cases (see Table v.23). TABLE V.23.——Type of cases handled by participation in political parties Type of Inactive Active Cases in Party in Party Total Domestic 48.75 68.75 57.64 (39) (44) (83) Business 51.25 31.25 42.36 (41) (20) (61) 100.00 (80) (64) (144) r = —.20 p<.05 The difference in the party activity of those hand- ling domestic and business cases may, as explained earlier, be due to the differences in their work situation. One may speculate also that those handling mostly business cases may tend to avoid partisan activity. These inferences, however, must be supported with more data than is available at the moment. The data available here, however, are connected with certain behavioral sets performed by lawyers handling differ- . r - _. — .- .. . .. -. ‘_.. . . . J.. . - a .. - . .. . . )I ...- . ..- .. .L . . .. ' - -.. '_ " . I .. .. .-~. .. \ .. ..u- ... . ' . ' \ -“ I _.---.. .. o .. . \ I ‘.. l 1 I , I' \ , ’ - - n . . . .I . ._ -l' . .‘.' . . . .' r . .. ' - - .- '- . . . .r . - . . -.. v. -- q . _ . . ' a . _ . . . r: . .... - _ .a _. v . _, ~' '. . - ... w . ' . . .. .- - . . . ... .J ,. _ .. .r __ , ' ._ '. ‘ _ . . . / -- ‘ 139 ent types of cases. These behavioral sets are not imputed but actually enacted roles derived for the most part from the specific mechanics involved in the cases handled and partially from the personality of the lawyer. The informa- tion was obtained by the following question: "Which of the following activities do you find yourself performing more frequently than others? And which do you like best?" (pleading, negotiating, advising and giving counsel, writing briefs, etc.). Further cross-tabulation made it evident that there is a relatively strong relationship between par- ticipation in parties, types of cases handled and specific role of lawyer. In the absence of an index of "combative- ness," these roles were used as rough measure of such an \ attribute.1 ”Pleading" involves strong combativeness and ”negotiating" and "advising and writing briefs" lesser de- grees of the same attribute. This manipulation of the data allows the writer to explain the differences in the party activity of those handling mostly domestic cases and those handling business cases in terms of combativeness. Domes- tic cases involve pleading more than negotiating or advising. "Combativeness" as an analytical concept was sug- gested by Professor F. Pinner, to whom the writer is in- debted. 140 The latter roles are performed mostly by those handling business and commercial cases. Evidence for these conclu- sions is illustrated in Table v.24. "Combativeness" may operate, therefore, as one intervening variable Out of many uncontrollable factors that make lawyers handling domestic cases more active in party organization than those handling business cases. Similar useful experiments could be per- formed if more data were gathered on specific aspects of the lawyers' work situation and activities they perform. TABLE V.24.--Type of Cases handled by role performed —_ __ Type of Advising and Cases Pleading Negotiating Writing Briefs Total Domestic 70.42 ' 50.00 43.40 57.64 (50) (10) (23) (83) Business 29.58 50.00 56.60 42.36 (21) (10) (30) (61) 49.31 13.89 36.81 100.00 r = .25 p<.001 Other aspects of interest that should be investi- gated are the lawyer's degree of involvement in professional activities, i.e., relationship to the American Bar Associa- tion and professional conferences, subscription to legal 141 journals or contributions thereto. How much time does a law- yer spend in the courts and generally what kind of work sdhedule does he have. In a metropolitan setting it will be important to know more about his ethnic background and that of his clients. All these are factors that are tied to the lawyer's work situation and possibly affect his political participation. The data reported in this chapter do not point out any significant differences in the overall political activity between lawyers in low-status work situations and those in higher-status work situations. There is evidence, however, that work situation affects the kinds of political activi- ties in which lawyers participate. Lawyers in lower—status work situations were found to be active in political parties and their auxiliary activities, while those in high-status work situations were very inactive in these arenas of politi- cal contention. Lawyers’ political party activity was found to be inversely correlated to their level of work situation. Lawyers in high-status work situations, on the other hand, seem to take their civic duties more seriously than those in low-status work situations. This is indicated partially in their voting record. They seem to vote much more often than lawyers in lower-status work situations. Further, more law- yers in higher-status work situations seem to utilize the 142 channels of "letter-writing and talking to legislators and public officials" and contribute money to the funds of polit— ical candidates more frequently than those in low-status work situations. Apparently they would prefer to use these chan- nels Of influence rather than become involved in the overt hierarchical activities that characterize participation in political parties. Lawyers in low-status work situations are found to evaluate the rewards of holding public office higher than those in high—status work situations. There is conclusive evidence which indicates that the higher the work situation of the lawyers, the lesser value they would tend to attach to the rewards of holding public offices, or what was termed, in Chapter III, the "expected utility” of politics. Further, there is evidence that differences in level of political ambitions (level of offices that would be ”seri- ously considered”) are directly related to level of lawyers' work situations. Lawyers in low-status work situations are generally inclined to consider seriously offices that are within reasonable reach (e.g., law-enforcement offices at the local and county level, municipal judgeships and sometimes state legislators). In contrast, those in high-status work situations are inclined to consider seats in the national 143 Congress or the Federal bench. There is evidence, also, that suggests that lawyers' participation in hierardhical activities (party echelons and auxiliaries) precedes activities of bargaining and influence. Sixty-three percent of those in high-status work situations *were office-holders at one time or another. Most of the offices that were held by these lawyers seem to be mudh the same offices desired by those who are now in low-status work situations. Thus it seems that the participation of those in high-status work situations in activities of bargaining and influence become facilitated considerably by their previ- ous political experience and connections. Further, it seems that lawyers tend to be particularly active in hierarchical politics so long as they are still in low-status work situa- tions. Participation in political party activity seems to decrease as they reach the higher echelons of the profession. The terms in which lawyers in high-status and low— status work situations perceive the utility of politics is discussed in the next chapter, as are certain orientations. CHAPTER VI STATUS OF WORK SITUATION AND THE PERSONAL STYLES OF LAWYERS In the preceding chapter, the data indicated fairly clearly that, first, lawyers in low-status work situations attach a higher value to the political rewards of holding office than those in higher—status work situations and, second, that lawyers attaching high value to political re— wards tend to be very active in politics. One question to be answered at this point is whether lawyers in lower— status work situations perceive the utility of political rewards in any different terms than those in high—status work situations and whether such a difference in percep— tions exists between those who are politically active and those not so active. In later paragraphs attention will be directed to a discussion of whether work situation, in fact, affects certain aspects of the lawyer's outlook, such as belief in Machiavelli—like principles and conservatism. 144 145 Status of wo;k Situation and Perception of the Utility of Political Rewards In the course of preparing the research design for this study, the writer tried to avoid explaining motives because of their complexity. Further, they are difficult to arrive at by means of the available instruments. Mo— tives, as C. Wright.Mills points out, are often "imputed or avowed as answers to questions. . . ."1 Moreover, motives are not easily articulated by the respondent him— self. In the light of these difficulties, it was decided to ask two projective questions which could indicate in what termg lawyers perceive the utility of engaging in political activities.2 Instead of classifying the answers obtained into numerous categories, the writer chose to sum— marize them into two broad headings "tangible—material" versus "intangible—symbolic" terms.3 Tangible—material 1C. wright Mills, "Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motive," Powery Politics and People (New Yerk: Oxford University Press, 1963), p. 441. 2The first question aSked: "What would you say law- yers in politics (or those who go into politics) expect to obtain from politics or political positions?" The second was a follow—up: "What would you say is the most important incentive or reward (of those you mentioned) for attracting a lawyer into politics?" (See questions 43 and 43A in Appendix B.) ' 3These two categories would correspond to Eulau's "selfish—exploitative" and "altruistic—contributive" in 146 included answers such as: Political advancement—-anticipating political position Advance legal business Make contacts and learn the ropes Advertise and gain recognition Personal gain——make money and intangible—symbolic included: Personal challenge--personally qualified Serve the public or to contribute to the community Fulfill an obligation to the community Fame and recognition Leadership The majority of the lawyers (57.64 percent) seem to perceive the utility of politics in tangible-material terms. It is safe to say that very often political rewards were perceived as connected with the legal career rather than a political career. Further inspection of the responses ob- tained here indicate that Ingham lawyers do not articulate their expectations in ideological terms. They tend to view politics as a vehicle for improved work situation rather than a means to reform the world around them. his The Legislative System (New York: Wiley & Sons, 1962), pp. 113—20. 147 Differences in the perception of the utility of po- litical rewards, it was hypothesized, are directly related to the work situation of lawyers. The data do not support this assumption. Instead, the data show that it is related to the social class from which the lawyer comes (see Table V1.1). This relationship was not totally unexpected and was, in fact, anticipated in the course of preparing the research design for this work. Lawyers from lower classes tend to View politics in tangible—material tenms more often than those who are "status—stable" or in upper classes. Lawyers from less privileged backgrounds would tend to see in political office the things they have wanted all along—- material benefit. Whereas lawyers coming from upper classes, who presumably have already been satisfied materially, would tend to see in politics symbolic benefits. TABLE VI.1.——Types of perceived utility of politics by social class of father. Types of Upper .Middle Lower Perception Class Class Class Total Tangible- material 44.90 61.36 66.67 57.64 (22) (27) (34) (83) Intangible— symbolic 55.10 38.64 33.33 42.36 (27) (17) (17) (61) 34.03 30.56 35.42 100.00 (49) (44) (51) (144) r =-.18 p4 .05 148 An interesting result which is by no means new to political scientists is the relation between political ac— tivity and the subjects' type of perceived utility of polit— ical rewards. The data show a relatively strong relation between how the rewards are perceived and political activity. Yet it is the opposite of What was expected. The data indi- cate that lawyers who are very active and attach high value to the rewards of holding office View the perceived utility of political rewards more in intangible—symbolic rather than tangible—material terms, as was initially expected (see Table V1.2). TABLE VI.2.——Types of perceived utility of politics by overall political activity. Types of Very Perception Inactive Active Active Tbtals Tangible- material 67.57 65.38 43.64 57.64 (25) (34) (24) (83) Intangible— symbolic 32.43 34.62 56.36 42.36 (12) (18) (31) (61) 25.69 36.11 38.19 100.00 (37) (52) (55) (144) r = .20 p <:.05 149 It seems that the more active in politics a lawyer becomes, the sharper is his skill to project the image of a public spirited citizen. This skill is not something that has to be mastered in school but it might develop and become a part of the behavioral sets that are internalized in the person in various phases and kinds of involvement. Those who are inactive have difficulty in developing such behavioral sets. In the following paragraphs the writer will pursue two more aspects of the lawyer's orientation. Status of Work Situation and Machiavellianism In Chapter II the writer discussed some of the ap— prehensions connected with the role of lawyers in society. The lawyer's image as that of "shyster" is not uncommon today. In these paragraphs an attempt will be made to test whether lawyers in low—status work situations are in fact "manipulators" or believe in so—called Machiavellian "prin- ciples of conduct." These principles were interpreted by Christie and Merton to mean "cunning, duplicity and bad faith."1 For the purpose of testing this attribute, six items formulated by Christie on the basis of a review of 1Richard Christie and Robert K. Merton, "Procedures for the Sociological Study of the Values Climate of Medical Schools,"Journa1 of Medical Education, XXXIII (October, 1958). 125—53. 150 Machiavelli were used.1 Christie and Merton describe the items as follows: The items in the scale express a conception of human nature as fallible and weak, a lack of affect (i.e., the value of detachment in dealing with other people), and the use of expedient procedures in social relations. Those making a high score on the (Mach.) scale endorse such items and reject items of opposed kind, such as those portraying human nature idealis— tically, emphasizing the need of warmth and affective involvement with other people, and holding that social relations should always be governed by strict adher— ence to ethical norms. The scale items were generally met by rejection by those to whom it was administered——however, not completely. Differences in agreement with the items are interesting. Medical students were found more Machiavelli-like than four other groups including Business Executives and Lobbyists. On these and similar data the authors concluded that a "philosophy of manipulation has substantial currency among 3 medical students." How is it with Ingham lawyers? Ingham lawyers rejected the items for the most part with varying degrees of disagreement. Scores from 1—6 were assigned to varying degrees of agreement or disagreement for each item (see Figure VI). The items are reported in Appendix C. 2Christie and Merton, op. cit., p. 134. 3Ibid., p. 136. 151 FIGURE VI.l Agree Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Disagree Strongly Somewhat Slightly Slightly Somewhat Strongly J j / / / l 2 3 4 5 6 The total scores add up to 36 points for the combined items. Lawyers disagreeing "strongly" were classified as "Not Machiavellian" and those agreeing or disagreeing less strong— ly were considered simply as "Machiavellian." Lawyers are sophisticated readers of the printed word and hardly can be ambivalent to what they read. The connotations cannot very well escape them. So that if they did not reject the items strongly, they might as well be considered Machiavellian. Further, this writer thinks that lawyers may have "manipu— lated" the items and hence tended to "Agree Slightly" and "Disagree Slightly" and "Somewhat" rather than taking stronger positions. Medical students may, in fact, have a Machiavellian intent and actually lack the manipulative §kill_that may (in fact) be common among Lobbyists, Business Executives or lawyers. Further, lawyers may be particularly sensitive to such fallible connotations as implied in cer— tain items. In Chapter III the writer hypothesized that lawyers in low—status work situations will tend to be more 152 manipulative than lawyers in higher-status work situations. The assumption here, of course, is that lawyers in low po- sitions would want to rise and that the struggle for better clients and improved work situation may make them expedient and believe "it is hard to get ahead without cutting corners here and there." This hypothesis does hold true. Lawyers in low-status work situations are, in fact, more Machiavel- lian than lawyers in higher—status work situations (see Table V1.3). These results should not be interpreted as conclusive because the instruments used are still in the stage of experimentation. It is, nevertheless, interesting to indicate some further attributes of Machiavellian lawyers. TABLE VI.3.-m umoa law #59 .Hmsvm pwummuo mum swfi Ham swan cmup IHHcU setup on m>mn m3 .mxoms Hmuapaaom mum mGMHUHSHHom Manson paw Mafia mo Hones: mmnma 4 .mucmEuHEEoo manmuam Imps: paw mmmfifioumfioo Gamma wxmfi 0p w>ms moamuo Hmoauaaom you mmumpfipcmo pmofi pops IsHEos #mm ou Hmpuo CH Swmcoaum umnsmaom maunmaam maucmaam uchmEom mamnoaum mmHmMmHQ mommMmHQ mwnmmman mwum< wmum< mmumfi ameusmpfimnoo «GESHOU mumanmonmmm may Ga MHmE Momso m msaomHm an wwumm Ime no mmnmm so» QUH£3 0“ pcmuxm any wuwoflpcfl nose .uswfimumvm £08m pmmu mmmmam .mmSmmH amaoom GHMpHmU pumzou mopsufluum paw msoasfimo Hmsomumm oammn ou Hummn mucmamumum mmmsa "pawn OS :0» axed UHSOS H was» mucmfimumum mo Hones: m m>ms H mumm 203 .quB so» pus? Op manomm wme ow mans on on m>m£ :0» cause umm ou pruo CH .uH ca wpo> u.:uasosm on use mmEoo coauomam cm 30: mumo p.cmmou GOmHmm m NH .mpnmmxm pun mcomqm an pooum lumps: on on poumoaam (Eon oou ma pano3 use .musums amass mmqmso u.smo sow .Nmamdm mosasu sou mmmsam HHHS manomm 3mm m .xcasv mafiomm umn3_nmupmfi oz .pmus 0:» mm mpHnm m poom nu ma ammo: use .mmaoaaom oaanmm mcflosmsHmsfl Houomm was» IHOQEH umoE we» mH Munoz .mstoHuHHom ma pmuwasmasmfi maucmsm Imum muw> mum manomm .pmucfiommm new no pmuomamlmu mnauumw asap Hams“ mo umoa psmmm mamaoaudaom mamaoupm umuamaom mauumaam mmHUMmHQ mmummman wwummman maunmaam unreasom wamnonum mmum< mmumd mmum< 204 .umoo 30H um mumo HMUHmmOA paw Hapuop umm meomm mHms OH #sbso usmficum>om one mecms on smfimmmaamsn mum>aum How msamson paw Hm3om UHH» IomHm mxHH mmchD m>mmH pasosm pcmEde>om m£B .06 Swap umnu pH on own pHsoam sou IqunmmB_sH ucmfisum>om msv .mchson paw use“ CH usmfipmmuu HHMH mean (www.mmm.mmm muonmmz HH .90..) .m pGHH smo MHOB ou munm3 0£3_Mponwum>m wasp pH on own on #3050 soumnfi Ignaz GH unmficum>om use .pmws mun» hmGOE m£#.Emsu m>Hm ou ususo soumnfismmz.ca psmEde>om map .mHoonom mHoE pHHSQ ou mHmn pom: hupnsou wan pasoum ms3ou paw mmHuHU HH Hamaouum amnzmsom Hangmaam Hangmaam mmHmMmHQ mmHmMmHQ mmHUMmHQ mmnmd HMQBMEom NHmsonum momma momma 205 .mHnsonu Mom mGHMmm mH mmHm mcomsm mumsup hHmumHmfiou on? maomsd .mucmsuHumsoo HHmnu Ho memos may msH I>umm GH cusp GSOGM mean Ivmm sH pmummnmucH mHOE wHanoum mum muHGSEEOU men CH meHUHpHHom #moz .Gsu mH unmecum>mm was 30: usonm mum on muse m>ms u.sop mGOHss Hoan umsu pH ou mum on usmso usmficuw>om one .uoa no muo> H Humbug? muse Hmuuma u.:mm0p pH umsu mGOHvomHm Hmsoapms men GH muo> mHmomm Hmnuo Name om .xsflsu we mxHH mHmoom #833 rune mumo mHMHUHHmo 33% M55 p.188 H mamcouum umnzmsom 323$ 339$ umszmaom .3989...“ mmHmMmHQ mmHmMmHQ wmummmHn mmumd mmumm mmnmd .Emsu op HUHmms mg on mmeHH mum mucmHHH mmsmown mpsmfium mxms meomm “no: 206 .Hmms ou usm3_hmcu “8:3.Emsu Ham» on ma cmumo mHmomm mesms ou MMB umwn use .ssu ma pcoesum>mm may 30s usonm mum £055 w>ms #_s0p mGOHumuomHoo mum: uamsn man pan» pa on mmm ou usmso uswfianm>om use .Om op ou Hummus mH 9H mmmHss mcHsumEOm pHp so» commmu Hmmu men wsomam HHmu Hm>mz .so maHom m.uw£3 unnumumpss MHHmmH p.380 08 mMHH Gomumm m was» pmumoHHm IEoo ow Emmm psmfiaum>om paw mOHuHHom mofiaamfiom .mmp mum>m pmu30uoum>o mGHEOUwQ ma Hun mnB .muussoo mash sH can mum mmsHsu 30s mmpHU ume “man mean» came on» mH muo> mHmomm >m3 msfi .mUHHHHUMm IHHmm @50m «0 umoo use an cm>m QOmHmm Hmnuo lam mHmA on hm3 mHs Ho #50 om UHsosm ms huHssu luommo may mm: mac HH awmcoaum unreasom mauumaam mmummman. mmummen mmHmMmHn HHunmaHm umnsmsom mmnmfl mmumm MHmdonum mmumfl 207 .mHmomm,uc0#MOQEH HmDHMHm on mmHB mH uH .mmop unmaauw>om msu pus? usonw mum mam m>ms u.:0p we 0MHH 0Hmomm .mumsu paw mums mumsuoo msHuuso usosua3 emmcm umm 00 69m: ma uH .£#H3 Hmnpon on smsosm vcmunomEH u.cmum mGOHu IomHm HmooH heme poom < .mmanu many usmfisum>om way 303 usonm hum mam m>ms cmo 08 mxHH mHmomm ans» >83_MHGO ms» mH mnapo> mamqoaum panamsom SHuBHHHm HHuHmHHm wmeMmHn mmHmMmHQ mmumMmHQ mmumm pmsswaom Samsonum mmumm owned .GHB ou mousse m 0>ms #.Gm00p Manna H50» 3ocx do» 2033 muo> OH ugmaaogEa ow u.ama 0H APPENDIX C MACHIAVELLIANISM.INDEX ITEMS The best way to handle people often is to tell them what they want to hear. Anyone who completely trusts anyone else is asking for trouble. It is wise to flatter important people. It is hard to get ahead without cutting corners here and there. Never tell anyone the real reason you did something unless it is useful to do so. Most people make friends because friends are likely to be useful to them. 208 APPENDIX D POLITICAL CYNICISM INDEX ITEMS In order to get nominated most candidates for political office have to make basic compromises and undesirable com- mitments. Politicians spend most of their time getting re—elected or re-appointed. Money is the most important factor influencing public politics. A large number of city and county politicians are political hacks. PeoPle are very frequently manipulated by politicians. Politicians represent the general interest more frequently than they represent special interests. 209 APPENDIX E LIBERALISM-CONSERVATISM INDEX ITEMS If cities and towns around the country need help to build more schools, the government in waShington ought to give them the money they need. If Negroes are not getting fair treatment in jobs and housing, the government in Washington should see to it that they do. The government in Washington ought to see to it that every- body who wants to work can find a job. The government ought to help peOple get doctor and hospital care at low cost. The government should leave things like electric power and housing for private businessmen to handle. 210 APPENDIX F SIGNIFICANCE TEST FOR PRODUCTHMOMENT CORRELATION The product-moment correlation was used in this work because it is better suited to our purpose than other tests. The chi square test measures the association or independence of two variables. The product—moment correlation tells us if an increase in one variable will be accompanied by a constant rate of increase (or decrease) in another. Further, it is a fairly powerful test. The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, represented in this study by the letter (r), provides a descriptive measure of the magnitude of linear relationship in the sample. Significance tests are rarely performed directly with (r). Fisher's transfor- mation to the normally distributed z-statistic is used in- stead. The formula is: z = loge 4 (l+r)/(l-r) The value of 2 corresponding to any obtained (r) can be easily found in a book of statistical tables. Then a critical ratio is constructed: 211 212 I) Z-Z _ \rl/(n-3) CR The significance to the result yielded (CK) can be checked in specially prepared tables that tell probability (p) of obtaining a CR of a given size or greater. All tables in the text have a level of significance at the .05 level or less. 1 See William A. Scott and Michael‘Wertheimer, Introduction to PsyChological Research (New Yerk: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1962), pp. 358-359. WW)71))MWMMWW“