H.L.A. Hart, Concept of Law, Philip Mullock, Primary rules of obligation, Secondary rules of recognition
Mullock on Summers on Hart is bad enough, but Summers on Mullock on Summers on Hart is worse. Fortunately or unfortunately, there is no rule (primary or secondary) entitling either of us to vouch Professor Hart into the proceedings. With all due respect to Professor Mullock (and to me, of course), I fear the two of us may be compounding erroneous interpretations of Professor Hart’s work. Sans Hart, I shall exercise admirable restraint and argue over the meaning of the scripture. Regrettably, Professor Mullock and I are both defenders of the faith; I had hoped to draw the fire of a non-Christian.
Summers, Robert S., "A Brief Rejoinder to Professor Mullock" (1965). Cornell Law Faculty Publications. Paper 1349.
Robert S. Summers, "A Brief Rejoinder to Professor Mullock", 1965 Duke Law Journal (1965)