A PRESS ENDORSEMENT OF THE COR P U5 ] UR I 5 HE proposal for a comprehensive, scientific statement of American law, in a more condensed and convenient form than has ever yet been attained, seems already to have successfully run the gauntlet of professional criticism.
The opinions of leading jurists assembled in our February number constituted perhaps the most remarkable collection of comments on any legal proposition that have ever been got together. What
for investigation in the natural sciences, and for the increased efiiciency of
university equipment. The fact is that a layman who is sufiiciently alert and desirous of making himself useful need not confine his attention to the time honored channels of giving. It is not too much to hope for, that laymen will
quickly appreciate the demand and the opportunity of this proposed Corpus juris. For they have already shown their ability to comprehend the pregnant and invulnerable arguments advanced
ever slight opposition may have since
for it, as appears from the editorial comments published elsewhere in this
developed
number.
among
lawyers
has
been The
This collection of editorial comments
tremendous endorsement secured from
is striking not only on account of the readiness with which the imperative need has been comprehended and the
vague, inarticulate, and negative.
leading members of bench and bar, on the contrary, has expressed itself in the irresistible rhetoric of cogent logic and
remedy accepted with the enthusiasm
intelligent conviction. The inference is not to be avoided that the project has only to be actually launched, under the direction of a suitable editorial stafl
born of conviction, but also because of the absence of any earnest adverse
supplied with adequate funds to guaran
have been printed in the press of the
tee complete fulfillment, for the legal profession throughout the United States to show its earnest, united support of
country, in which an editor has taken
an undertaking sure to result in priceless benefits.
wey and the learned jurists who have endorsed their views. The group of
But our leading benefactors are not lawyers but laymen. A philanthropist is sometimes able to appreciate needs which can be fully realized only by
editorial comments now printed is doubtless not less significant, in its own way, than the former collection of
criticism.
We do not recall a single
instance, among all the comments which
the pains to write in opposition to Messrs. Andrews, Alexander, and Kirch
those of technical training. To this circumstance we owe such endowments
professional opinions. Just as the latter may be taken as gauging the sentiment of the enlightened portion
asthose for advanced medical research,
of the profession, so the former must
