Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 05.pdf/582

 Old-Time Currency. obtain a verdict by arguments based upon other than the facts in the case and the conclusions legitimately deducible from the law applicable to them.' It is further said that such practice is of sufficiently grave importance and so highly objectionable as to require the decided condemnation of the court. Whether counsel under such circum stances remain silent or object, may be alike prejudicial to his cause. Silence may be construed into acquiescence, objection may call forth a damaging repartee." In Union Cent. Ins. Co. v. Cheever, 36 Ohio St. 201, the court permitted counsel for one of the parties, in argument to the jury, to read and comment upon matter not in evidence, nor relevant to the issue, and which was prejudicial to the opposite party. Held, an irregularity, or abuse of discretion which prevented a fair trial, and for which the verdict should be set aside and a new trial ordered. In Kinnaman v. Kinnaman, 71 Ind. 417, it was held not error to grant a new trial for such cause, though no objection was inter posed by opposing counsel. In State v. Poland, 85 N. C. 576, counsel,

541

in addressing the court upon a motion for a mistrial on the ground of alleged fraud in selecting the jury, said that two of the jurors had gone into the box "with souls blackened with perjury and bribery," etc., in the presence and hearing of the jury then impanelled, the opposing counsel objecting, and persisted in the use of abusive language toward the jurors during the trial, without being stopped by the court. Held, ground for a new trial. In State r. Begonia, 69 Mo. 400, the court said : " It is also alleged as error that the prosecuting attorney, in his closing argu ment, commented on the tact that defendant had not called as witnesses his two brothers, who were indicted as accessories. It does not appear that this conduct of the prosecut ing attorney was made a ground -for a new trial in the motion for a new trial; but it does appear that the attention of the court being called to it, the attorney was promptly rebuked by the court and commanded to keep within the record. This, under the principle announced in the case of The State v. Lee, 66 Mo. 165, cured the error, if any."

OLD-TIME CURRENCY. BY M T. SANDERS. IN these days of so much talk about mono metallism and bimetallism, the writer is reminded of a quaint chapter in the early history of the Southwest, which may be re produced with interest to the reader. In the first settlement of this country, in those sec tions remote from the lines of commerce, the inhabitants, owing to the scarcity of gold and silver, were forced to adopt some stand ard of value in the exchange of commodities. Paper money was fluctuating and uncertain in value, and its circulation for this reason was limited. The early settlers, in order to carry on their trading and supply their

wants, substituted deer-skins and peltries as a currency by which they bought and sold, and supplied themselves with powder and lead, sugar and coffee, salt, and other neces saries. These skins were always in demand at the different trading-points, and furnished a convenient and ready substitute for money, because the finest and most valuable were of small size, and when dried or dressed could be easily carried long distances. A pioneer who had to travel 'two or three days over the mountains to reach a trading-place, could pack, in addition to his trusty rifle, enough skins or peltries to lay in sufficient