Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 05.pdf/268

 English and American Bar in Contrast. evidence very much in the style used in the States. This opening the solicitor watches; for both he and the counsel have the same brief. The counsel holds his copy, and often refers to it. He is apt to iterate, " I am in structed that," etc., etc. In the very great ma jority of cases counsel opening the facts has not enjoyed the privilege of intercourse with the client, or of having questioned the pro posed witnesses; then he relies entirely upon the brief prepared by the solicitor, who has conferred with the client and examined the witnesses, and upon the brief has outlined the salient facts. Quite often questions have been framed. This mechanical and indeed iron-clad method of examination greatly de prives it of that spontaneity which is so often a charm of examination in American courts with counsel, who is his own solicitor and brief-maker. Solicitors often prepare briefs even for cross-examinations, and have been known to write out series of questions in anticipation with strong suggestions as to tone and policy. The longer are these briefs, and the more the folios, increased charges arise for fresh manufacture of costs. An American lawyer watching the pro gress of the trial would perceive that he was not witnessing one to be likened to a trial in any American city. He would be especially impressed with the absence of emphatic ob jections, — excepting some briefly stated and briefly ruled upon by the judge, who is sup posed to be, at least for the moment, omni scient and infallible and without argument, unless the judge should ask for a citation or an explanation. What newspapers in this country sometimes call " wrangles between judge and counsel " become utterly unknown in an English court. Indeed the affectation of deference that is usually shown therein by counsel to the judge is sometimes de pressing to one's sense of manhood. No exceptions are taken, because appeals are heard upon case stated, and new trials are argued for and considered upon the actual occurrences, and even upon errors not cog nizable during the trial. When counsel

241

have finished their addresses, it is the judge in England who " sums up." His Honor (his title in a county court), or his Wor ship (his title magisterially), or his Lord ship proceeds to talk to the jury. The phrase " charge the jury " belongs only to what is addressed to a grand jury. " Re quests" are unknown, because, as has been already said, " the judge is omniscient and infallible for the nonce; " and if he errs relief can be had on appeal to other judges, who by reason of rank are more omniscient and more infallible, — if there can be com parative infallibility. After verdict there is sure to be an appeal from the beaten solicitor. The appeal is a new deal in the gamble for costs, to which each barrister is "willin1," like Barkis. Litigation in England so partakes of mech anism that one can hardly expect the Brit ish lawyer to take that personal interest in the client which obviously every American lawyer takes. Here it may be remarked that the British judge is more or less a perfunc tory functionary, compared with his American brother. The British judge never seems to feel that he represents the people so much as the Crown and Church and State. The American judge, whether appointed by a governor or elected by popular vote, is al ways in touch with the people. The English judge in his very bearing puts on the mask of a " superior being." He seems to be a " Sir Oracle," whene'er he " opes his mouth." He is never chosen from the rank of solicitor, but always from among the Queen's Counsel. Once he had to be selected from among the Sergeants-at-Law. But now, Sergeants' Inn is dismantled, and the old orders with their coifs are legal magnates of the past, living now only in the charmingly written memoirs of Mr. Sergeant Robinson or Mr. Sergeant Ballantyne. Nevertheless, as a rule, the solicitors of the kingdom are best fitted to become judges, because they are really more learned in the law. For it is they who coach barristers and supply them with briefs, and as a rule the examinations of solicitors are