Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-01-28
'DEN|AL BY PATTERSON Mr.; TAYLOR REPLIES
Demands Investigation to Meets Dr. Goudys Charge Of
Clear Him of Carmack's Death Plagiarism.
BRANDS CHARGES AS LIES DENIES LITERARY THEFT
Invites Cum Warm Concentrations Vol
MES Against Him. ume Quoted
WILLING FOR LEGAL ACTION FULL CREDIT WAS GIVEN
to
Tral-Hs Address His Of


Has an author who has received during
A long period of time nothing but praise
| the right to murmur at one attack, how
ever wanton it may be? / refer, of
course, to the article of Mr.. William T..
Curtis, printed in The Star of Wednes-
day. reproducing extracts from an as
| sault upon my new book, The Science
of Jurisprudence" from the pen Of DR..
Goudy, professor of Roman law at Ok
ford. Unfortunately for me, l have been
presumptuOus enough, at the end Of thir-
ty years of patient comparative study, to
discover a far-reaching phenomenon, in
volving the growing together of Roman
| and English law in recent years, which
has earned for me the cordial congratula-
tions of some of the greatest masters OF
Roman law in the world. DIR. Rudolph
Sohm of the University of Leipsc. the
most eminent of the German jurists, after
a careful examination of my book, as
whole, has given his assent to my dis
covery. He says: The principle formu-
| lated by you has, however, the great ad-
vantage of COMPRISING into a short state
ment a thousand-year period Of legal de-
velopment. by means OF a few words pre-
senting sharply defined picture OF an
| enormous mass Of material Your work
evidences the energy and success with
which American legal science has pro-
crossed in the field of Roman as we'll as
Germanic legal history, L therefore con-
| graduate you, as we'll as American Jur1s-
prudence, upon the appearance OF 1t.
other Concentrations.
! Upon the same subject the famous Dr.
Won l.. Mites of the University of Leip-
| sic has said:
| The idea of representing the operation
| of Roman and English law in universal
| historical relations is fruitful as it is
| splendid. and l have found in your book
| a great deal of instruction and inspiration.
1t is work whose study appeals to the
| heart of every man. j, as a Romanist. am
! particularly delighted to find a compre-
| hensive appreciation of the lasting and
| immortal significance of the Roman law
/! in the most distant regions, and have
| found In 1t mass OF facts with which
l was unfamiliar. The combination OF
English and Roman elements OF law
which you portray is most interesting, and
| only a scholar who possesses an almost
| incomprehensible knowledge of both sys-
TENS of law could produce such work.
| The breadth of your view has at all times
excited my wonder.
On the same sub ject Judge Shackelford
| Miller. dean of the Jefferson School OF
Law has said:
Indeed, 1T must be said that The
| Science of Jurisprudence is the most I'M
| Of law that has appeared on this side OF
the ocean since Names Ancient Law was
| published in 1861. The generalization OF
| the fusion of Roman and English law now
| first worked out by DR.. Taylor is an en-
tirely new contribution to legal and politi-
! cal science. Like the accurate and pro-
| found generalization of Maine, that sum
med up the agencies of legal progress ir
fiction, equity and legislation this new
| and equally accurate and profound gen.
eradication of DR.. Taylor must be readily
accepted by students of Jurisprudence
| everywhere"
On the same subject Prof. Westlake, the
| great light on international law at the
| University of Cambridge. has said:
This is sane and fruitful geperaliza-
ton. BY giving its due part to each OF
the two great influences in history il
should assist in bringing peoples to un'
| derstand one another. The Romanist
| should learn to study, respectfully, the
| notifications which the English common
law has made for itself in Roman private
| law, and the English lawyer should learn
not to boast as if his common law were
| all or even. in the main, his national crea-
| ton. Each may be content with the great
claim. which. barring some notifications.
| is allowed him..
| All this praise of an American discovery
! of 4 new thought in the history Of Ro-
| man law (the best of it coming from Ger
man sources) was too much for the self
| constituted Oxford guardian Of that sub
| ject. The worst form of literary jealousy
has prompted him to attempt to discredit
my book as a whole. despite the fact that
| he frankly confesses that he has read
| only one chapter of it. Ignoring the dis
| covery l have made, he charges that
have not given the proper credit to -four
| or five authors to the general details
| OF the history of Roman law which are
| the common property of everybody.
DR.. Goudy's Charge.
DR.. Goudy has never been able to write
a book of his own. but he has added some
| notes. very good notes. to the well known
work of Muirhead. His charge. as we'll as
| 1 can understand it, is that ! have not
given sufficient credit for the materials l
have used in my chapter on Roman Law
| to DR.. Rudolph Sohm. to the Rt. Hon.
James Bryce. to Mr. Muirhead and to DR..
| Greenidse. To use his own language:
ITO reasonable amount of borrowing
| by a writer from his predecessors. espe-
| cialy the borrowing of references, no one
| will object. And in a reconcile subject,
| like Roman law, where each of the au-
thorities cannot always readily be con-
| c,,lt iC a