Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 02.pdf/549

 504

not valid and the oath not binding. Many wit nesses were thus enabled, through the aid of the interpreter, to lie without perjury. In an insol vency case, in which a Jew sought the benefit of the Act, a well-known barrister represented an opposing creditor. His instruction had been to question the applicant in regard to certain mat ters in which his answers, if affirmative, would disclose valid ground for refusing the application. To the surprise of counsel the Jew denied every thing, and it seemed as if his instructions were not correct. At this juncture it was suggested that the Jew be required to swear on the life of his son. The advocate put this unusual sugges tion to the presiding judge (Sir J. Colville), who adopted it, and the Jew was adjured accordingly. The same questions were again put to him; but this time they elicited affirmative replies, and counsel's object was accomplished. — Irish Law Times.

the Chief-Justice to the court, laid his sacrilegious hands upon it, took it out of the carriage, and de livered it over to Mr. Mason. This the ChiefJustice held to be contempt of court, and fined Mr. Mason,£10.

An extraordinary story comes from America, — the land of cooling drinks, fearsome oaths, and all things strange and tall. It appears that a cer tain Mr. Peter de Quincy, possessed of many shekels, has recently thought fit to die, and has left his entire fortune to his wife. There was nothing calling for comment in this commendable act; but the manner in which this fortune was to be disposed of is remarkable. The widow is to receive the entire capital literally at the rate of £20 (or its American equivalent) per hour. For many months to come the lady will have to at tend the lawyer's office, and as each hour strikes receive the correct amount from the cashier. History does not state whether this amusing game is to be played all night as well as all day; but if it is, the unhappy lady and the cashier may be expected to join the eccentric Peter at an early date. — The Jurist.

In the case of Charles Areutzen et als., who was arrested in Philadelphia for selling the " Kreutzer Sonata," on the ground that it was an obscene publication, Judge Thayer decided in favor of the book, and ordered the defendants to be dis charged. In the course of his opinion the learned judge delivered himself as follows : —

"Truth " records a very singular case from Cey lon. A man sold a horse; the purchaser did not pay for it, and the vendor claimed that the horse should be returned to him. This Mr. Mason, a magistrate, ordered should be done. But in the mean time the horse had been resold to the ChiefJustice. Mr. Mason ordered the horse to be pro duced. So a policeman, seeing the animal stand ing near the court in the carriage that had brought

"Presumptive proof," observes the most agree able of essayists, " is a very presumptuous person age. People circumstantially found guilty ought at the worst to undergo only a circumstantial hanging. A gallows should be paraded around them, the executioner should make a circuitous pretence of turning them off, and the bystanders should exclaim : ' There you are, not, indeed, posi tively hanged, but circumstantially. You may pre sume that you are dead; the proof of your being so is not direct, but strong symptoms of an execu tion are round about you. You may say that you have been in very hanging circumstances.'"

"The Court was reminded upon the argument that the Czar of Russia and the Post-Office officials of the United States have condemned this book as an un lawful publication; that the former has prohibited its sale within his dominions, and the latter have forbid den its transmission through the mails. "Without disparaging in any degree the respect due to these high officials within their respective spheres, I can only say that neither of them has ever been recognized in this county as a binding authority in questions of either law or literature."

Honest witnesses, anxious to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, do not receive from the bench the protection to which they are entitled. They are badgered, brow-beaten, and sometimes made to commit involuntary perjury, by "smart" lawyers, "the Court " smiling the while, and seeming to enjoy the overbearing insolence of the bar. It is a disgrace to the dignity of justice that such things are permitted and even tacitly encour