Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-04-10

fed that the charge of plagiarism I'M
pliedly conveyed is unfounded. we no"
express our deep regret that the charge
should have found place In our col
umns.
Dean Kirchwey's Comment.
The editors print the following comment
on the review in question, the comment
being written by George ". kirchwey,
dean of Columbia University Law School.
ct is an ungrateful task and one which
ONLY the stern demands OF justice cooId
excuse to criticise the work of a reviewer
i'm the columns to whose hospitality he
was invited. But the character OF the
review of DR.. James Brown SCOTS work
which was printed in the last number
of this journal makes the duty plain
one. .
TT would not do to call the review In
question a hostile one. for that would be
to impute a motive which the reviewer
disclaims but it Is certainly WITHIN
bounds to characterize 1t as harsh, UNI
generous and wholly lacking IN that con-
sideration which one member of the con-
pect from another. The imputation of
literary dishonesty which the review con-
veys calls for even stronger condemna-
ton. Surely the evidence marshaled IN
the portentous form of the deadly parai-
lei furnishes not the slightest basis for
such an insinuation. 1t would be only
too easy to retort, on the critic by calling
attention to the ingenious way in which
he has arranged his evidence, selecting
his quotations from separate and distinct
para graphs of the original and suppress
ing intervening passages In which DR..
Scott refers to the authorities whom he
is paraphrasing or quoting. But this
would be as unfair to our reviewer as he
has been to his author and no more So
Evidence of Haste.
THE truth is that Dr. scott's work
along with abundant evidence of an
anxious desire to give full credit for
the material of which he has rightfully
made use, shows instances Of careless
ness in this regard in a composition
which bears ether evidences Of haste
But to read plagiarism into these In
stances is the very abnegation OF
criticism For surely the virtue so OF tn the
ness and the scholar who sets himself
to vindicate the worth and dignity OF
scholarship, pure and undefled, should
gests as of the facts which he sets
| forth. Indeed, as everybody knows.
facts are the. lyingest things In the
world unless they are presented ~ d the
| torted by prejudice or by defective
vision-though not SO easy to exhibit
! i'm parallel coiumns-is at least as alb
norrent 10 SOuuu SSHOidi SHiP aS "a mis-
placed or forgotten citation.
"It is because he believes that the re-
view in question sins against these canons
of criticism that the writer Of these lines
has craved of the editors the space to
comment briefly on DR.. Scott's book.
Among hose who are familiar with the
| authors brilliant work at the second
Hague conference, especially with the re-
markable series OF addresses delivered by
him in tnat distinguished assemblage, and
with his numerous and varied contribu-
| lions to the American Journal Of Interna-
| tional Law, OF which he 10 the editor, his
| reputation as an international lawyer and
writer needs no defense. The Appraisal
! of his book may safely be left to his col
| leagues at The Hague. to the distin-
gdished Secretary of State under whose
wise and inspiring leadership the Ameri-
can delegation acted. and to the masters
of international law who have united In
praisine it. work that has received the
approval of such international jurfsts al
de la Pradelles in France. Nys In Bel
GUM. Oppenheim in England and Bald
win in the United States may we'll be re-
earued as secure in the esteem OF the
profession