Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 22.pdf/102

 90

The Green Bag

OUTLINE ANALYSIS OF MEMORANDUM IN RE CORPUS [URIS [Printed pp. 59-89, supra]

1. TE! IMPERATIVI DEMAND 01' TH! PROFESSION. . . . . . . . ..

59-69

Views of James C. Carter, 59, 64, 65; Sir Francis Bacon, 60; Nathan Dane, 60; arnes Wilson, 60-62, 69; Edmund Randolph, 63; Henry T. Terry, 64; Judge illon, 64, 69; James Parsons, 65; David Dudley Field, 65. Sir Henry Maine and "tacit codiﬁcation," 64; Dean Wigmore and "exposi tory codiﬁcation," 64; the vice of legislative codiﬁcation. 65. Views of Mr. ustice Holmes. 66; Mr. Justice Brewer, 66; I-Iirschfeld, 66: Frederick W. hmann, 66; Senator Beveridge, 66; General Hubbard. 67'. Professor Leonhard, 67', Francis Lynde Stetson, 67, 68; Mr. ustice Moody, 68; Dean Kirchwey, 68; Dean Ames, 68; Sir Montague Crac enthorpe, 68; Law rence Maxwell, 69; Judge Dillon. 69; Chief Justice McClain, 69.

11. METHOD FOR SECURING TE! PRODUCTION 01' TH]: WORK. . .. (a) run PLAN TO BUILD 'rnn woan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

70 70

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

70

l. 2.

The work practically possible, Holmes, Dillon and Carter noted, 70. Beyond power of one man to accomplish; co-ordinated chart 0 many experts necessary. under centralized executive control, 70, 71.

BOARD OF EDITORS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

31

To be composed of seven of the ablest men in the profession; to be supreme in all editorial matters.

ASSOCIATE BOARD OF EDITORS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

71

A method for securin to the profession in a ractically eﬁ'ective form the results of the labors o the great experts in the aw School Faculties, as well as their aid and co-operation. Chief Justice McClain and Dean Ames quoted, 72; views of Mr. Justice Holmes and Judge Staake, 73.

ADVISORY COUNCIL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

74

To consist of the ablest men on the Bench and at the Bar.

BOARD OF CRITICISM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

74

A method to secure widespread criticism in advance of publication.

TEXT-METHOD OF TREATMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

74

1. Condensation, Cleamess and Precision .,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Views of Austin Abbott, 74, 75; Mr. Justice Holmes quoted, 75.

74

2.

3.

Treatment of Authorities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (a) Ruling Cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (b) Leading Cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

75 75 75

(c) Illustrative Cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Views of James Dewitt Andrews, 75, 76. ‘

75

System of Classiﬁcation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

76

A logical hilosophical system essential. Views of some able jurists. George . Biddle on Chancellor Kent's Commentaries, 76. EXECUTIVE CONTROL, ETC. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Reference to views of Mr. Justice Holmes, Jud e Staake, Francis Rawle, Secretar of War Dickinson, Alton B. Parker, Woodrow Wilson and Chief Justice cClain, 77. Views of Judge Grosscup and Dean Kirchwey, 78. Inadequacy of the digests and encyclopaedias, 78; Judge Dillon and Lawrence Maxwell emphasize the point, see p. 69.

SIZE OF THE WORK. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B) THE FINANCING OF THE PROJECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. COMMERCIAL BASIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (a) Law publishing ﬁrms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (b) New Company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

77

. .. 79 . .. 79 79-80 . .. 80 . . . 80 . . . 80

Views of Chief Justice McClain, Judge Grosscup, Francis Lynde Stetson, 80-81.

II.

FOUNDATION OF JURISPRUDENCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Introductory remarks——The call of the future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arguments for Foundation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Would develop uniformity between the states. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Would make justice more prompt,‘ exact and cheaper. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Would place America in lead in jurisprudence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

81 81 82 83 84 87