Opinions upon the Corpus juris Project for immediate use, by one of ample means and of public spirit, whose brain has seized sympathetically upon the peculiarities of the situation, solved its difficulties at a glance, and then with a ready self-sacrifice, thrown him self into the breach, in order to become, in the truest sense, a public benefactor: for the benefits to be derived from the adoption of this plan will not be confined to the legal profession; will extend themselves to every citizen, rich or poor, high or low, and of every class and condition in life, who falls under the sway of legal institutions. The patron of such an enterprise--and unfortu nately it is a sad truth that lawyers are not rich enough, either individually or collectively, to meet the emergency—has also an oppor tunity of benefiting the public which ought to satisfy the highest kind of altruism. Hon. Amasa H. Iaton,
National
Conference
of
95
ment of what is actually the existing federal law and state law in this country there cannot be any difference of opinion. I agree with all that your distinguished correspondents say upon that subject, and I agree also with the view, which some of them express that the undertaking is one of immense magnitude and difliculty, the com pletion of which in a satisfactory way would be not only an honor to those who carried it through and to the age in which it was effected, but also a service of almost inestimable benefit to the people of this country. Those who have studied what has been done in the way of codification from the times of Theodosius II and Justinian down wards know how immensely difficult the work is. And although what you propose is not codification by legislative authority, but only a statement of the existing law by the com
President of
the
bined action of skilled and learned jurists,
Commissioners
on
their task could not but be in some ways as difficult as that of codifiers.
Uniform State Laws, l90l-09:—
I am deeply impressed with the importance of a statement of the whole body of American law in proper philosophic scientific form, but have always been deterred from looking upon it as possible, being appalled by its magnitude and the apparent impossibility of any prac tical method of bringing it about. You have now hit upon such a practical method and if any one will make it possible financially, his reputation will be made for ever through centuries to come by the side of those who do the work. The subject appeals to me further on account of my connection with the work of the Con ference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, of which I have been President for eight years. With fifty-one different jurisdictions under one federal government, most of them being sovereign states and supreme within their respective spheres, there is the greatest necessity for the work you contemplate and it will have an overpowering influence upon
and favorable to the movement towards uni formity of state legislation that is now making itself manifest all over the country. Rt. Hon. James Bryce, the American Bar Association's only honorary member; author of "The American Commonwealth," etc.; for merly Regius Professor of Civil Law at Ox ford:— As to the desirability of having a con cise, rational, well-ordered and lucid state
Sir Frederick Pollock, Professor of juris prudence at Oxford 1893-1903 and Professor of Common Law in the Inns of Court, London, l884—l890; author of many works on law and jurisprudence, and editor English Law Quar terly Review:— Even with our centralized law and judica ture it is hard enough for a practising Eng lish lawyer to keep himself abreast of legal developments. The tendency is for busy practitioners to become mere specialists in one department. I have been asked by learned Continental friends to recommend a book giving a trustworthy general view of the law of England, and have told them with regret that there is none. Blackstone is too old to be patched up into a modern text-book—and so, I conceive, is Kent, though a later book and in some ways better. On your side all these difficulties are inten sified. l have long wondered how you carry the load of two score and more independent sources of reported (if not always properly reportable) case-law, with quite serious divergences between not only legislative changes but the judicial interpretation of the Common Law in the different states. There is therefore no doubt in my mind as to the bene fit of such a work as you contemplate, and I agree with your correspondents thereon. In particular I would subscribe to every thing Mr. Bryce says.
