Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 05.pdf/570

 Cfje PUBLISHED MONTHLY, AT $4.00 PER ANNUM.

SINGLE NUMBERS, 50 CENTS.

Communications in regard to the contents of the Magazine should be addressed to the F.ditor, HORACE W. FULLER, 15^ Beacon Street, Boston, Mass. The Editor will be glad to receive contributions of articles of moderate length upon subjects of interest to the profession; also anything in the way of legal antiquities or curiosities, facetiœ, anecdotes, etc. THE GREEN BAG.

"7E most heartily approve the suggestion made in the following communication : —• ALBUQUERQUE, N. M, Oct. 2, 1893 Editor of the " Green Bag " : DEAR SIR, — An accomplished Spanish scholar recently called my attention to a word with which I was previously unacquainted, and which 1 think is worthy of adoption into our own language. In the "Diccionario de Legislacion y Jurisprudencia'' of Escriche, under the head of " Leguleyo," will be found a definition, of which 1 have made and inclose herewith a translation. We have no word in the English language which is quite so extensive in its meaning. The nearest approach to it is " pettifog ger;" but that does not convey any idea of the superlative character of the " leguleyo," which is defined as follows; — "LEGULEYO. He who, without penetrating to the foun dation of the law, knows only enough to confuse and perpetuate suits with the subtleties of forms. He is, among lawyers, the same as a charlatan among physi cians. 'Leguleyus [says Cicero, Hook I de Oratore], quidam cautus et acutus, pra'co actionum, cantor formularum, anceps sillabarum.' Francisco Poleti, in his history of the Roman Bar, calls the leguleyos ' charlatans, harpies, bloodsuckers of the human race, and consummate frauds, who involve their clients in the labyrinths of never-ending litigation.'" Hoping that you will make the entertaining and possibly useful suggestion to the profession that we incorporate " leguleyo " into our vocabulary, I am Yours truly, F. W. C.

THAT there is much quiet fun going on at times in the letters of lawyers to each other is a fact well known to the profession. As an illustration, wit ness the following verbatim copy of a letter, written in June, 1876, by a Washington lawyer to his legal

friend in Boston, who had asked a gratuitous ser vice in relation to the pension case of a man named Swett : — My DEAR JOHN, — Yours of 2d is at hand enclos ing fifty dollars*retamer, which is refreshing. You say that Oliver H. Perspiration went in for glory, and came out anatomically imperfect. Very like. His next misfortune was employing you as an attorney. As soon as I received your letter, I put on my hat and went to the Pension Office. I ascended to the top thereof, and interviewed the head-devil of the establishment. After a good deal of heavy waiting around, I found the man who knows all about it. He got out the papers, and we sat down and looked the thing over. I did n't hand him any money, not being myself in that line of business; nor did I grab the papers, as I am not a candidate for the Presidency. This man looked the papers over carefully. He said you made a great mistake writing in purple ink : it is not recognized at the Department. Again, he says there's a '-t" that isn't crossed, — fifth line from top, in "surgeon's certificate," — but when I told him you were a friend of Governor L, and was talked of one year for the Legislature, he said he would cross that "t" himself, and it would be all right. Then he wanted to know why in (1 should n't like to say what) you did n't forward the photograph of the applicant. I told him it was probably ignorantia legis, — you 41 been troubled with that all your life. However, I said I had an old photograph of Schuyler Colfax I would send in and file; and he said that would do just as well. Then he wanted to know if you were married, and if not, why not. He said "going to the circus" was not relevant, and you couldn't inject any such testi mony into the case. Then he wanted to swear me before a colored justice that I was to receive no fee for my services. I told him what Horace Greeley would probably have told him under the circum stances. Then he said we would go out and take a drink, and telegraph you it was all O. K. I said. "No; this Centennial year we must be more eco nomical, — more like our forefathers." Then he got mad. and said he would n't play any more. 'I calmed him down, and got the following facts out of him: —