More and more I am impressed by the inescapable personal element in the judicial decision. We are fond of saying, approvingly, that a judge should be objective, but is it perhaps the wrong metaphor, an idea borrowed, like so much else that obscures our thinking on general topics, from an analogy between the physical sciences and things incommensurable with them? Say indeed that a judge must be fair, or that he must be impartial: that is essential. He must strip himself of all prejudices, certainly; except, I ought to add, those prejudices which on consideration he is prepared to stand by as his sincere convictions. You see how quickly, just because he is not a machine, one begins to tie oneself in words and qualifications of words. He has no right to be biased; but then no human mind is constructed with perfect balance. He must give an honest hearing to all points of view and to arguments that do not even introduce themselves to him as plausible; but it is unreal to think of a judge of experience as if he were a mere hearing aid. […]