The author of Men of Law (1947) spends a long time in displaying the ambivalent values that make the law inefficient, in presenting the conflicts of liberty versus authority, stability versus change, etc., that result in the vagueness that satisfies people. ""Law abhors definitions like nature a vacuum""; law is hostile to science; reforms have only temporary values --in effect law is a myth. That the Constitution survived the Civil War he does not deny, but he points out how it was transformed and he details the many examples of outworn, intricate and often confusing legalities. The many types of courts, the expert knowledge needed to channel cases into the right court, and the laws themselves now on record which have nothing to do with today's problems. And of course the jamming of the court sessions with dockets crowded with current cases. A book for students of the American legal scene, for legal theoreticians and dedicated lawyers, and the law schools, this is filled with thought provoking material which may cause a few explosions as it crosses swords with the established dignity and omnipotence of the Bar.