mass of disjointed incongruities in our statutory enactments is averted.

The great magazines, such as the 19th Century and others, no less notable, have been the radiators of the Light which led our Empire of to-day through some of its darkest epochs. To them the most renowned of our Statesmen have attributed their triumphs, and the magnificence and wisdom of their Policy.

The Law Magazine should occupy a corresponding place in the Legal arena-in the making of Law, its expansion and its harmonizing, as well as in its expounding.

It is the aim of the CANADIAN LAW TIMES to take its place in this arena, and give itself to this work in Canada.

But it will require not merely a passive but an active co-operation by the Legal Fraternity throughout Canada, in which Fraternity we reckon not merely the Practising Lawyer and the University Professor who is the initial moulder of the Lawyer's mind, but also the real Student of Law who aspires to a correct comprehension of the great principles of justice and right which underlie our whole legal fabric.

It is these principles which, luminous as X-rays, present to us our statutory additions in a light totally different to what they seem in the dull and formal phraseology of the Statute Book. One man applies them, another does not; and the result makes all the difference to the community and even to the lawyer himself.

From every part of Canada we hope to get that cooperation which is indispensable to success.

Co-operation will be not merely in contributing to the CANADIAN LAW TIMES Notes and Articles, but in reading what others have contributed. This is the combat of mind with mind which produces clearness of conception, just as the clashing of argument in Court brightens the advocates and sends its corruscation to the Bench.

It ought to be a privilege and an appreciated advantage to discuss by way of Notes or Articles in the CANADIAN LAW TIMES phases of the Law or even decisions of the Courts as the one may fail to meet an injustice or as the other may clarify the Law and correct misconceptions.

Many cases in which it is claimed there has been a failure of the Law are not appealed for reasons unstated; but they may be worthy of elucidation in the CANADIAN LAW TIMES for the benefit of the Profession.

The Editor is available to all his correspondents, and will render what service he can in reading and publishing their contributions.

In this Co-operative Policy the Editor will not shirk his own work, nor will it be of such a character that he can employ in it the heritage of blunted scissors and stale paste which his predecessor announced in the December issue that he had magnanimously transmitted to his successor.

It is not scissors and paste that produce such Articles as won for the West its Divorce Lawsarticles written by the present Editor in July and published in the CANADIAN LAW TIMES in October, 1917, and succeeding months, nor those in which a few months since he exposed and assailed the obnoxious Suzerainty of Canada over the West (vide CANADIAN LAW TIMES, August and September, 1919), nor yet the Article on a Wife's Right to Alimony which appears in the present issue.

The bountiful donation of his predecessor being certain to rust and rot through non-user is therefore courteously disclaimed by the new Editor.

Legal Education.

It will be seen that the new Policy of the CANADIAN LAW TIMES is essentially educative; and it harmonizes with a movement in the various Provinces of Canada for co-operatively formulating a scheme or plan for Legal Education. It has been long needed.

An admirable article pertinent to the project by Professor Herbert A. Smith of McGill University,

Montreal, appeared in the CANADIAN LAW TIMES for December last. It is an article suggestive and instructive, though we do not wholly accept some of its divisions or classifications, nor yet the order in which it claims that various branches of Law should be taken up by the student.

The great defect in the Lawyer in Canada as he emerges upon the scene of his life's work is the absence of a thoroughness in the comprehension of the great fundamentals of Law. He surpasses, longo intervallo, the Old Country Barrister and even the Old County Solicitor in quick acuteness and knowledge of the practical details of legal procedure. He regards this as the equipment of success; because his training lies more along the lines of a Clerk in a Solicitor's office than of a student qualifying for guiding his clients through the labyrinths of a complex science.

From the moment he signs his Articles he is upon active service, and in a large office he soon gets into the swelter of ceremonial work where first his aim is to become so important as to be allotted a stenographer to take his dictation. Fortunate is the man who reaches this eminence slowly. He is more likely to become a great lawyer and a real jurist and to achieve ultimate success in his profession than is the man with the glitter and tinsel of precosity who almost with a dash establishes himself as an important factor of the office machinery.

I am not disparaging genius or even superior mental powers; but I deprecate the perversion of them. I am indicating the peril in mistaking the glitter of the ephemeral for the genuine glow of the solid and per

manent.

Law is a vast and recondite subject. Its mastery is a science; and it can be attained by study and not by empirics.

The Empiric is the product of modern methods of Canadian Education, and it will continue to be so, and to yield superficialities unless there is some great counteractant supplied and put into operation by which the student will be placed upon a higher and

wider plane of thought. His conceptions of his profession must be elevated; and the order in which he enters upon his studies nearly reversed. He must begin at the bottom instead of the top; and he must learn historically rather than experimentally.

His studies should enlarge the mind-make it analytical, co-ordinative and conclusive rather than transform the memory into a vast storehouse of disjecta membra―a formidable mass of ore untouched by the smelter, though it is fit to be made into the finest of steel.

What a scurry one frequently sees through the terrible pile to pick up some fragment which the memory contains but cannot locate! How different it is with the man who having absorbed principles-not merely remembered isolations of dogma, doctrine and decision-arranges the most complicated facts around the particular principle that governs them; and places his hand upon his authority.

That is the man who eventually towers tall; and whom the Judge esteems.

Such men are rare; and this fact must be due to the Legal Education.

For the working out of real Legal Education, the Lectures in the Law Schools ought to be something very different from Experts upon practice. They can only teach what they know, and they can only mould the pupil's mind by their own standard. What is it? That is the question for the Benchers and Controllers of our Law Schools and of our Legal Education. Appeals in Divorce Cases.

The Law Journal has at last recognized that the Western Provinces have the English Divorce Law.

It makes the avowal in the December issue, though the Privy Council decision which finally affirmed the views first propounded by the present Editor of the CANADIAN LAW TIMES in 1917, was delivered in May of last year. A reluctant convert!

And in the same number it has an article in which the question of "jurisdiction" is again trotted out. A sorry nag surely.

In the earliest Article I wrote and in subsequent ones, I made it as clear as the other parts of the controversy, that while the Parliament of Canada had authority to enact the Divorce Law, it had none over the Jurisdiction of the Courts, which was emphatically and exclusively within the power of the Provincial Legislatures; and that Parliament having as a fact enacted the Law, constructively and by a just interpretation, the Provinces had established Superior Courts of Record whose function or jurisdiction was to administer that Law like any other Law.

That position the Privy Council affirmed literally. Now the question is raised whether the Provincial Court of Appeal can be invested by the Provincial Legislatures with jurisdiction to hear appeals from Divorce Decrees by Courts of first instance.

There is not, and there never could be, any doubt about this to a Lawyer. The Court of Appeal has the jurisdiction to hear appeals from Divorce Judgments like any other judgments.

It was, as I pointed out from the start of the con troversy, the fault of the Provincial Legislatures that the Superior Courts they established were not specifically invested with "Jurisdiction" to dispense the Divorce Law which the Parliament of Canada had enacted for the Province of Manitoba and for the North-West Territory, which afterwards became Saskatchewan and Alberta. This omission made a cul-desac for men who had no conception of the highway of Constitutional Law. They stuck there wondering.

But the insertion of three words, I said, was all that was possibly needed to clear the route, though I maintained that it was not needed at all. The Privy Council said the same; and I am satisfied, even if the Law Journal still has doubts.

Let us stop this whimsical badger and see what we can do for rectifying the abnormality of Ontario, and placing it on an equality with the other Provinces in matters of Divorce Law.