FOR THE DEFENSE

The definite assurance that Stanley Reed's appointment to the Supreme Court will not prevent his sitting upon the finals of the Ames Competition at the Law School answers, but does not discredit the Crimson's earlier expression of doubt on this subject. The questions posed yesterday have reaped the indignant and confident rebuttal printed elsewhere. That confidence is blind to the fact that supreme court appointments are extremely touchy matters. Justices, whether potential or confirmed, are of necessity super-shy with regard to any and all public appearances that might be used in any way as the basis for a misfounded rumore of partisanship concerning some legal question.

The national comment in the press since Saturday has dwelt upon Mr. Reed's past leading part in the argument of leading cases for the Government. Obviously he cannot be too discreet with regard to legal issues that may later come before him as a member of the court. The question for argument on Friday presents such issues.

One wonders what uniformity of answer, if any, would have been obtained had the misleading questions scoffed at by Mr. Kranz been posed to a representative group of law school students. It is submitted that great diversity would have resulted. Of course the best indication of the fact that the questions were legitimate grounds for speculation is the fact that Mr. Kranz himself has researched concerning question five, producing a subtle and interesting truth worthy of the legal world. His use of the term "pressure of business" takes us back to the good old academic days of the court plan.