Part 7 (2/2)

In some cases counsel receive answers to questions which they had no business to put, and these, if not quite to their liking, are what they justly deserve. The following story of George Clarke, a celebrated negro minstrel, is a case in point. On one occasion, when being examined as a witness, he was severely interrogated by a lawyer. ”You are in the minstrel business, I believe?” inquired the lawyer. ”Yes, sir,” was the reply. ”Is not that rather a low calling?”--”I don't know but what it is, sir,” replied the minstrel; ”but it is so much better than my father's that I am rather proud of it.” The lawyer fell into the trap.

”What was your father's calling?” he inquired. ”He was a lawyer,”

replied Clarke, in a tone that sent the whole Court into a roar of laughter as the discomfited lawyer sat down.

At the Durham a.s.sizes an action was tried which turned out to have been brought by one neighbour against another for a trifling matter. The plaintiff was a deaf old lady, and after a pause the judge suggested that the counsel should get his client to compromise it, and to ask her what she would take to settle it. Very loudly counsel shouted out to his client: ”His lords.h.i.+p wants to know what you will take?” She at once replied: ”I thank his lords.h.i.+p kindly, and if it's no ill convenience to him, I'll take a little _warm ale_.”

A tailor sent his bill to a lawyer, and a message to ask for payment.

The lawyer bid the messenger tell his master that he was not running away, and was very busy at the time. The messenger returned and said he must have the money. The lawyer testily answered, ”Did you tell your master that I was not running away?”--”Yes, I did, sir; but he bade me tell you that _he was_.”

A well-known barrister at the criminal Bar, who prided himself upon his skill in cross-examining a witness, had an odd-looking witness upon whom to operate. ”You say, sir, that the prisoner is a thief?”--”Yes, sir--'cause why, she confessed it.”--”And you also swear she did some repairs for you subsequent to the confession?”--”I do, sir.”--”Then,”

giving a knowing look at the Court, ”we are to understand that you employ dishonest people to work for you, even after their rascalities are known?”--”Of course! How else could I get a.s.sistance from a lawyer?”--”Stand down!” shouted the man of law.

At Worcester a.s.sizes, a cause was tried as to the soundness of a horse, and a clergyman had been a witness, who gave a very confused account of the transaction, and the matters he spoke to. A bl.u.s.tering counsel on the other side, after many attempts to get at the facts, said: ”Pray, sir, do you know the difference between a horse and a cow?”--”I acknowledge my ignorance,” replied the clergyman. ”I hardly know the difference between a horse and a cow, or between a bully and a bull.

Only a bull, I am told, has horns, and a bully,” bowing respectfully to the counsel, ”_luckily for me, has none_.”

”In Court one day,” says Mr. W. Andrews in _The Lawyer_, ”I heard the following sharp encounter between a witness and an exceedingly irascible old-fas.h.i.+oned solicitor who, among other things, hated the modern custom of growing a beard or moustache. He himself grew side-whiskers in the most approved style of half a century ago. ”Speak up, witness,” he shouted, ”and don't stand mumbling there. If you would shave off that unsightly moustache we might be better able to hear what was coming out of your lips.” ”And if you, sir,” said the witness quietly, ”would shave off those side-whiskers you would enable my words to reach your ears.””

”My friend,” said an irritable lawyer, ”you are an a.s.s.”--”Do you mean, sir,” asked the witness, ”that I am your friend because I am an a.s.s, or an a.s.s because I am your friend?”

Counsel sometimes comes to grief in dealing with experts. ”Do you,”

asked one of a scientist, ”know of a substance called Sulphonylic Diazotised Sesqui Oxide of Aldehyde?” and he looked round triumphantly.

”Certainly,” came the reply. ”It is a.n.a.logous in diatomic composition of Para Sulpho Benzine Azode Methyl Aniline in conjunction with Phehekatoline.” Counsel said he would pursue the matter no further.

An action was brought by the owner of a donkey which was forced against a wall by a waggon and killed. The driver of the donkey was the chief witness, and was much bullied by Mr. Raine, the defendant's counsel, so that he lost his head and was reprimanded by the judge for not giving direct answers, and looking the jury in the face. Mr. Raine had a powerful cast in his eye, which probably heightened the poor fellow's confusion; and he continued to deal very severely with the witness, reminding him again and again of the judge's caution, saying: ”Hold up your head, man: look up, I say. Can't you hold up your head, fellow?

Can't you look as I do?” The witness, with much simplicity, at once answered, ”I can't, you squint.” On re-examination, Serjeant c.o.c.kle for the plaintiff, seeing gleams of the witness's recovery from his confusion, asked him to describe the position of the waggon and the donkey. After much pressing, at last he said, ”Well, my lord judge, I'll tell you as how it happened.” Turning to c.o.c.kle, he said, ”You'll suppose ye are the wall.”--”Aye, aye, just so, go on. I am the wall, very good.”--”Yes, sir, you are the wall.” Then changing his position a little, he said, ”I am the waggon.”--”Yes, very good; now proceed, you are the waggon,” said the judge. The witness then looked to the judge, and hesitating at first, but with a low bow and a look of sudden despair, said, ”And your lords.h.i.+p's the a.s.s!”

Serjeant c.o.c.kle, who had a rough, bl.u.s.tering manner, once got from a witness more than he gave. In a trial of a right of fishery, he asked the witness: ”Dost thou love fish?”--”Aye,” replied the witness, with a grin, ”but I donna like c.o.c.kle sauce with it.” The learned serjeant was not pleased with the roar of laughter which followed the remark.

Mr. H. L. Adam in _The Story of Crime_ says he remembers a very amusing incident in one of our police courts. A prisoner had engaged a solicitor to defend him, and while the latter was speaking on his behalf he suddenly broke in with, ”Why, he dunno wot the devil he's talking abaht!” Thereupon the magistrate informed him that if he was dissatisfied with his advocate's capabilities, he could, if he chose, defend himself. This he elected to do, and in the end was acquitted, the magistrate remarking that had the case been left to counsel he would unquestionably have been convicted.

In cross-examining a witness, says Judge Parry in _What the Judge Saw_, who had described the effects of an accident, was confronted by counsel with his statement, and asked, ”But hadn't you told the doctor that your thigh was numb and had no feeling?”--”What's the good o' telling him anything,” replied the witness. ”That's where doctor made a mistake.

I told 'im I was numb i' front, and what does he do but go and stick a pin into my back-side. 'E's no doctor.”

From the same source is the following story. Another man was testifying to an accident that had occurred to him at the works where he was employed. It was sought to prove that his testimony was false because he had a holiday that day, and this poser was put to him: ”Do you mean to tell the Court that you came to work when you might have been enjoying a holiday?”--”Certainly.”--”Why did you do that?” The reply was too obviously truthful. ”What should I do? I have nowhere to go. I'm teetotal now.”

A Jew had been condemned to be hanged, and was brought to the gallows along with a fellow prisoner; but on the road, before reaching the place of execution, a reprieve arrived for the Jew. When informed of this, it was expected that he would instantly leave the cart in which he was conveyed, but he remained and saw his fellow prisoner hanged. Being asked why he did not at once go about his business, he said, ”He was waiting to see if he could bargain with Mr. Ketch for the _other gentleman's clothes_!”

A sign-painter presented his bill to a lawyer for payment. After examining it the lawyer said, ”Do you expect any painter will go to heaven if they make such charges as these?”--”I never heard of but one that went,” said the painter, ”and he behaved so badly that they determined to turn him out, but there being no lawyer present to draw up the Writ of Ejectment, he remained.”

This must be the lawyer who, being refused entrance to heaven by St.

Peter, contrived to throw his hat inside the door; and then, being permitted to go and fetch it, took advantage of the Saint being fixed to his post as doorkeeper and refused to come back again.

<script>