scholarship, news and new ideas in legal history
This was an excellent scholarly - and gentlemanly - exchange between Dan Ernst and Barry Cushman. I enjoyed the historical analyses of limited direct evidence, perhaps a good example of what good legal history can accomplish. Both Dan and Barry recognize that new evidence may surface in the future to challenge their respective positions currently.For me, the discussion was also nostalgic. I was born in 1930, living through the Great Depression (although I was not depressed), the New Deal and FDR, a hero to my immigrant parents. Back in the late 1930s, early 1940s the mantel in the living room of our apartment in Boston's Roxbury District was this bronze clock with FDR cast in the top center, Frances Perkins on one side (I think the left) and a third member of FDR's Cabinet on the other side (whose name I can't remember, as the memory is the second thing to go). I did not know who Perkins was as a pre-teenager. But I decided one day to take the clock apart and then to put it back together again. Alas, I was not successful with the latter. That's probably why I went into the law rather than science.Also nostalgic was my move after marriage and 4 children to Brookline, where I learned that Charles Wyzanski grew up a stones's throw from our new home. I was aware of Wyzanski as a Federal Judge in Boston as a young lawyer and that there were some notorious cases under his care, but I wasn't aware of his New Deal days. In my retirement, I have done a lot of catch-up reading via legal blogs on the Internet and Dan's posts on the New Deal/Administrative Law have filled in many gaps in my knowledge of the New Deal.So thanks, Dan, thanks Barry.
Post a Comment