Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 03.pdf/63

 44

part of the Church to set forth all the virtues of the saint, the miracles his bones have wrought, and all the merits that can be ascribed to the deceased. And, on the other hand, the function of the Devil's advocate is to find flaws in all this evidence, to slight the good deeds, to doubt the miracles, and to rake up all the evil that can be said or thought against the deceased, so as to show that there is no good ground for the canonization. Hence, a '• devil's advocate " is often an apt description of any one who makes unscrupulous accusations and abuses worthy characters.

In 108 Mass. 324, where Dora F. Hook mulcted in $3708.33 the false Washington] George, who had won her young affections and then married another girl, the letters of a sympathizing female friend were in evidence : — "Dora, this world is cruel, this world is untrue; our foes are many, our friends are few. . . . Dora, it is hard and cruel to bear, and God knows I pity you. . . . Hear me talk ... I wish I could have power over the men, and influence them as I like. What misery they cause! . . . That Friday she [the hated rival] was here Wash, got a horse and carried her home, and asked me if I wanted to go down with them. So l went; and she showed me her wedding things. Oh, Dora, is n't it surprising, the change! At times it goes through me like an arrow. But I must say her dress and each suit was splendid. She is tall, and her dress trails considerably; it is fiftyeight inches long, the skirt. They will be married next week, I expect. He said he wanted me to come. I shall feel very bad to go, knowing you and all your misery; but shall. I suppose. I'll bet I shall cry almost through the ceremony. Now, Dora, don't kill yourself mourning; but strike out and sec what you will do in the line of matrimony." Apparently Dora thought damages a still better line. In Howson's case, Hetley 104, 4 Car. [., a prohibition was prayed for against Howson, a "viccar," who preached too loud; also spit freely over a parishioner and his wife against whom he had a grudge; also made jests in his sermon, pointed at an inn-keeper with whom he was at odds, saying Christ was laid in a manger because Joseph and Mary had not money enough for a i hamber at the inn, but that that was the knavery of the inn-keeper.

"Sir," said Dr. Johnson to Sir William Forbes, "a lawyer has no business with the justice or in justice of the cause which he undertakes, unless his client asks his opinion, and then he is bound to give it honestly; the justice or injustice of the cause is to be decided by the judge. Consider, sir. what is the purpose of the courts of justice, it is that every man may have his cause fairly tried by men appointed to try causes. A lawyer is not to tell what he knows to be a lie, he is not to pro duce what he knows to be a false deed; but he is not to usurp the province of the jury and of the judge, and determine what shall be the effect of evidence, what shall be the result of legal argument. If, by a superiority of attention, of knowledge, of skill, and a better method of communication, a lawyer hath the advantage of his adversary, it is an advantage to which he is entitled. There must always be some advantage on one side or the other, and it is better that that advantage should be by talents than by chance." — Boswcll's Johnson.

Rev. Samuel W. Dike, in the "Century," gives the following interesting statistics : — "Out of the total of 328,716 divorces granted in the United States in the twenty years from 1867 to 1886, inclusive, 289,546 were granted to couples who had been married in this country, and only 7,739 were from marriages celebrated in foreign countries. The place of the marriago of 31,389 is unknown. One fourth of these latter are reported from Connecticut, as that State does not require a disclosure of the place of marriage in its libels for divorce. Now. the report shows that out of the 289.546 divorces whose place of marriage was in this country and was ascer tained, 231,867, or 80.1 per cent, took place in the same State where the persons divorced had been married, and 57,679 couples, or 19.9 per cent, ob tained divorce in some other State. The migration from State to State to obtain divorce must therefore be included within this 19.9 per cent. But it cannot be even anything like the whole of it. For in 1870 there were 23.2 per cent, and in 1880 22.1 per cent, of the native-born population of this country living in States where they were not born. Of course this last class comprises persons of all ages, while that under special consideration is made up of those who migrated between the date of marriage and that of divorce. The length of married life before divorce in the United States averages 917 years, which, I think, is from one third to one half the average con tinuation of a marriage in those instances where divorce does not occur. Careful study may lead to a