[Monroe Freedman, the Lichtenstein Distinguished Professor of Legal Ethics at Hofstra Law School and the former Dean of that school, describes his recent work on Henry Lord Brougham and zeal.]
Professors Fred Zacharias and Bruce Green recently wrote an article on "reconceptualizing" advocacy ethics. In the course of rejecting the ethic of zealous representation, they erroneously stated that Henry Lord Brougham repudiated his famous statement on zeal in Queen Caroline’s case.
Brougham is a hero of mine, not only because of his zeal in threatening George IV with graymail on behalf of Queen Caroline, but also because his zeal extended to a leading role in emancipating slaves, ending flogging in the British Navy, reforming the Poor Laws, extending education for the poor, achieving political emancipation for the Jews in England, fighting for equal rights of Catholics in Ireland, defending freedom of the press, and reforming the courts.
Because of my regard for Brougham, as well as for his statement on zealous representation, I have written two articles refuting the erroneous claim that Brougham ever repudiated his famous statement. One is Henry Lord Brougham – Written by Himself, 19 GJLE 1213 (2006); the other is Brougham and Zeal. Both are available on SSRN.