Today, however, some legal commentators are skeptical about the validity of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), arguing that accepting ADR methods requires a leap of judicial faith. Some experts frequently cite the common law's alleged hostility toward arbitration to justify the theory that ADR is an unacceptable method of conflict resolution. ADR is criticized on the grounds that the courts can render more or better justice than private dispute resolution mechanisms and that adjudication serves broader purposes than the achievement of peace among disputing parties. However, this author argues that Blackstone accurately reported the common law position on arbitration and that commentators who rely on the theory that the common law was hostile to ADR do so in error. Judicial opinions and historical records are cited to support this position. 91 notes