Conclusion
The Conclusion reflects on the accuracy of the nineteenth-century American perception that the United States possessed a distinctively adversarial legal culture and considers how developments traced in this book relate to the present. A comparative overview of nineteenth-century continental European and English civil procedure reveals that Americans were correct that their legal culture was uniquely adversarial. But the postbellum emergence of industrialization and concomitant birth of the regulatory state gave rise to new specialist lawyers, valued more for their expertise and negotiating skills than for their ability to litigate. The path connecting the late nineteenth-century zenith of adversarialism to the present was thus indirect. Nonetheless, the Conclusion argues that the history recounted in this book contributed to making American legal culture today distinctively adversarial. And it suggests that, while there are virtues to adversarialism, Americans have paid a high price for this inheritance—including comparatively greater difficulty in obtaining access to justice. Although a comprehensive reform proposal lies beyond this book, the Conclusion explores some nonadversarial possibilities raised by Americans’ forgotten history of equity and conciliation courts. The starting point, it argues, is to abandon the (constructed and contingent) assumption that due process and adversarial procedure are necessarily the same.