The difficulty with traditions is that in every case sooner or later an attitude of skepticism supplants trusting credulity, and the thirst for accurate knowledge demands facts and demonstration. One may infer that such a desire overtook the inhabitants of Eastland, Texas, thirty years ago, for the tradition that has grown up in the West as to the indestructability of the horned frog was put to the test. A live frog was placed in the cornerstone of the courthouse of Eastland. Now the old structure is to be vacated, the cornerstone will shortly be opened, and opportunity will be granted to interested parties to see whether the horned frog has lived up to expectations. It is reported that a large crowd is expected to be on hand for the opening.

The fact that the issue is clear, that true situation is extremely simple should make the decision clear and easy. The frog thirty years ago was out to do or die, and by this time must have accomplished something. The tradition about horned frogs will stand or fall with him, and somebody should be satisfied with the result. Having appealed to Caesar, Caesar's decision must be accepted, even though Caesar be only a horned frog.

But since the case seems clearly outlined and since judgment is to be passed so literally, it seems as though there is one loophole apparently overlooked that should provide an alibi for the frog in case of failure. According to the statement of the case the tradition in question claims no more for the frog than that he can live one hundred years without food or water. There seems to be no claim that the frog could live for thirty years without sun, air, and exercise, and while it is not explicitly stated that the corner stone lacked adequate ventilation, the inference is that no provision was made. If this proves to be the case, of course the death of the frog could not be in fairness held against him.