Part 6 (2/2)

A young lawyer who had just ”taken the coif,” once said to Samuel Warren, the author of _Ten Thousand a Year_: ”Hah! Warren, I never could manage to get quite through that novel of yours. What did you do with Oily Gammon?”--”Oh,” replied Warren, ”I made a serjeant of him, and of course he never was heard of afterwards.”

[Ill.u.s.tration: SAMUEL WARREN, Q.C., MASTER IN LUNACY.]

Warner Sleigh, a great thieves' counsel, was not debarred by etiquette from taking instructions direct from his clients. One day, following a rap on the door of his chambers in Middle Temple Lane, a thick-set man, with cropped poll of unmistakably Newgate cut, slunk into the room, when the following colloquy took place.

”Mornin', sir,” said the man, touching his forelock. ”Morning,” replied counsel. ”What do you want?”--”Well, sir, I'm sorry to say, sir, our little Ben, sir, has 'ad a misfortin'; fust offence, sir, only a 'wipe'--”--”Well, well!” interrupted counsel. ”Get on.”--”So, sir, we thought as you've 'ad all the family business we'd like you to defend 'im, sir.”--”All right,” said counsel; ”see my clerk--.”--”Yessir,”

continued the thief; ”but I thought I'd like to make sure you'd attend yourself, sir; we're anxious, 'cos it's little Ben, our youngest kid.”--”Oh! that will be all right. Give Simmons the fee.”--”Well, sir,”

continued the man, s.h.i.+fting about uneasily, ”I was going to arst you, sir, to take a little less. You see, sir (wheedlingly), it's little Ben--his first misfortin'.”--”No, no,” said the counsel impatiently.

”Clear out!”--”But, sir, you've 'ad all our business. Well, sir, if you won't, you won't, so I'll pay you now, sir.” And as he doled out the guineas: ”I may as well tell you, sir, you wouldn't 'a' got the 'couties' if I 'adn't 'ad a little bit o' luck on the way.”

The gravity of the Court of Appeal was once seriously disturbed by Edward Bullen reading to them the following paragraph from a pleading in an action for seduction: ”The defendant denies that he is the father of the said twins, _or of either of them_.” This he apologetically explained was due to an accident in his pupil-room, but everyone recognised the style of the master-hand.

Serjeant Adams, who acted as a.s.sistant judge at the sessions, had a very pleasant wit, and knew how to deal with any counsel who took to ”high-falutin.” On one occasion, after an altercation with the judge, the counsel for the prisoner in his address to the jury reminded them that ”they were the great palladium of British Liberty--that it was _their_ province to deal with the facts, the _judge_ with the law--that they formed one of the great inst.i.tutions of their country, and that they came in with William the Conqueror.” Adams at the end of his summing up said: ”Gentlemen, you will want to retire to consider your verdict, and as it seems you came in with the Conqueror you can now go out with the beadle.”

There was always a mystery how Edwin James, who at the Bar was earning an income of at least 10,000 a year, was continually in monetary difficulties. Like Sir Thomas Lawrence, he must have had some private drain on his resources which was never disclosed. Among others who suffered was the landlord of his chambers, whose rent was very much in arrear. In the end the landlord hit upon a plan to discover which would be the best method of recovering his rent, and one day asked James to advise him on a legal matter in which he was interested, and thereupon drew up a statement of his grievance against his own tenant. The paper was duly returned to the landlord next day with the following sentence subjoined: ”In my opinion this is a case which admits of only one remedy--patience. Edwin James.”

In a case before Lord Campbell, James took a line with a witness which his lords.h.i.+p considered quite inadmissible, and stopped him. When summing up to the jury Lord Campbell thought to soften his interruption by saying: ”You will have observed, gentlemen, that I felt it my duty to stop Mr. Edwin James in a certain line which he sought to adopt in the cross-examination of one of the witnesses; but at the same time I had no intention to cast any reflection on the learned counsel who I am sure is known to you all as a most able--” but before his lords.h.i.+p could proceed any further James interposed, and in a contemptuous voice exclaimed: ”My lord, I have borne your lords.h.i.+p's censure, spare me your lords.h.i.+p's praise.”

Mr. W. G. Thorpe, F.S.A., in his entertaining volume of _Middle Temple Table Talk_, relates a curious story of a judge taking an extremely personal interest in a case which was brought before him. A milk company had sold off a lot of old stock to a cake-maker, and the cake-maker had declined to pay because the milk had turned out to be poisonous. As the case went on the judge became more and more exercised. ”What do they do with this stuff?” he asked, pointing to a ma.s.s of horrible mixture. ”Oh, my lord, they make cakes of it; it doesn't taste in the cakes.”--”Where do they sell these cakes?” was the judge's next question, and the reply was, ”They are used for certain railway stations, school-treats, and excursions.” Then the defendant specified one of the places. ”Bless me!”

said the judge, turning an olive-green, ”I had some there myself,” and with a shudder he retired to his private room, returning in a few minutes wiping his mouth.

There is another story of a counsel defending a woman on a charge of causing the death of her husband by administering a poisoned cake to him. ”I'll eat some of the cake myself,” he said in Court, and took a bite. Just at this moment a telegram was brought to him to say that his wife was seriously ill, and he obtained permission to leave in order to answer the message. He returned, finished his speech, and obtained the acquittal of his client. It transpired afterwards that the telegram business was arranged in order that counsel could obtain an emetic after swallowing the cake.

Mr. Montagu Williams tells a story, in his interesting _Leaves of a Life_, of two members of the Bar, one of whom had made a large fortune by his practice, but worked too hard to enjoy his gains, while the other, who only made a decent living, liked to enjoy life. They met on one occasion at the end of a long vacation, and the rich man asked his less fortunate brother what he had been doing. ”I have been on the Continent,” the other replied, ”and I enjoyed my holiday very much. What have you been doing?”--”I have been working,” said the rich Q.C., ”and have not been out of town; I had lots of work to do.”--”What is the use of it?” queried the other; ”you can't carry the money with you when you die; and if you could, _it would soon melt_.”

From the same work we take the following story of Serjeant Ballantine.

On one occasion he was acting in a case with a Jewish solicitor, and it happened that one of the hostile witnesses also belonged to the same race. Just as the serjeant was about to examine him, the solicitor whispered in Ballantine's ear: ”Ask him as your first question, if he isn't a Jew.”--”Why, but you're a Jew yourself,” said the serjeant in some surprise. ”Never mind, never mind,” replied the little solicitor eagerly. ”Please do--just to prejudice the jury.”

[Ill.u.s.tration: JOHN ROMILLY, BARON ROMILLY, MASTER OF THE ROLLS.]

No collection of the wit and humour of the Bar would be complete without some specimens of Sir Frank Lockwood's racy sayings. From Mr. Augustine Birrell's _Life of Lockwood_ we quote the following:

”A tale is attached to Lockwood's first brief. It was on a pet.i.tion to the Master of the Rolls for payment out of Court of a sum of money; and Lockwood appeared for an official liquidator of a company whose consent had to be obtained before the Court would part with the fund. Lockwood was instructed to consent, and his reward was to be three guineas on the brief and one guinea for consultation. The pet.i.tion came on in due course before Lord Romilly, and was made plain to him by counsel for the pet.i.tioner, and still a little plainer by counsel for the princ.i.p.al respondent.

”Then up rose Lockwood, an imposing figure, and indicated his appearance in the case.

”'What brings _you_ here?' said Lord Romilly, meaning, I presume, 'Why need I listen to you?'

”Lockwood looking puzzled, Lord Romilly added a little testily, 'What do you come here for?'

<script>