IDEAS AND CONCEPTIONS OF JURISPRUDENCE 465 



public corporations carrying On the business of transportation and 

 the railroad contracts are declared void. Thereupon a great cor- 

 poration, which the legislature so much feared, now demands special 

 rates and privileges over the public highways; it insists upon lower 

 rates and better services than are accorded to its competitors in order 

 that by such favoritism it may crush out competition and secure a 

 monopoly. It sends millions of tons of freight, and the manager of 

 every line of railroad is anxious to get the business. Will the mana- 

 ger yield to the demand and give the special rate to get the business? 

 Will he give better rates and facilities than his competitor across 

 the way in order to secure the traffic of this producer and shipper of 

 enormous quantities? It is competition, and that is what the legis- 

 lature wanted. There is now no mutual contract between these 

 quasi-public servants, with penalties attending the violation of the 

 agreement, to prevent acceding to the demand. The special rate 

 will be given and the industrial trust which this legislation sought to 

 curb thrives under the law. The great corporations could hardly 

 have done better for themselves had they formulated the statute. 



All who formulate law, be they legislators or jurists, must use 

 words; but the jurist, having a knowledge of the science of law, will 

 put into his formula limitations which will recognize existing agen- 

 cies and conditions in society, and while he gives force to the prin- 

 ciple invoked he will not allow its operation, through the careless 

 wording of the rule, to destroy or impair the operation of other 

 principles of equal value. He has a knowledge of the science of 

 law and formulates his rule according to its principles, using words 

 covering all the conditions and principles involved. This is the use 

 of the science; the application of the science; the ART of jurispru- 

 dence. 



We may next inquire whether it is proper to affix any territorial 

 limits to the investigation. In other words, can there be a juris- 

 prudence of a particular state? Is it proper to speak of the juris- 

 prudence of England, or of France, or of Germany, or of any other 

 nation? Can there be more than one science of law? We must 

 recognize that there is a diversity in the forms of government which 

 formulate and enforce rules of conduct. Peoples differ in language, 

 pursuits, knowledge, and many of the things embraced within the 

 word " civilization." May there not, therefore, be a principle good 

 for one nation, which is error, or at least half truth, for another 

 nation? 



Take the two great systems, the Roman law and the English 

 common law. The Roman, at least as finally codified, was the pro- 

 duct of cultured minds selecting and creating rules according to 

 their best judgment of right and expediency. On the other hand, 

 the common law was the product of the people adjusting themselves 



