Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 07.pdf/151

 126

almost all cases where his son was con cerned as counsel, espoused and pleaded and gave countenance to such cause and finally gave judgment on that side" (his son's), " by which means justice was per verted, the law abused and violated, and the subject exceedingly injured, which recom mended his son to great practice, and large sums of money were by parties given him to buy his father's favor." 1 If this account of Atwood had nothing to support it but the statement of a governor, whose own conduct as an official was dis reputable, it would be received with distrust; but what we know of Atwood's career in the Colony, from other sources, warrants the belief that it was substantially true. Of in formation derived from other sources is an account, in an abstract of letters received from New York by the Lords of Trade, of Atwood's conduct upon the trial of one Roger Baker, a lieutenant of a regiment of militia in New York, and the keeper of a tavern where the Anti-Leislerians, or Bayard party, were in the habit of meeting, who was indicted for saying that King William was'" a nose of wax," who would be "no longer king than the English please." It described how the jury was packed with Leislerians, or, as the account calls them, "Dutchmen," the last one impaneled, who was an Englishman, being reluctantly taken by the sheriff to fill up the jury. Three witnesses only were examined, the first of whom testified that the words were spoken by Baker, but added that they were all very drunk, it being a holiday. The other two swore that they were present during the whole time, that they heard no such words, nor anything like them; that they were all drunk, and that the witness who testified to the speaking of the words was so drunk as to be unable to " stand." Upon this evi dence Atwood charged the jury to bring in a verdict of guilty. The jury retired, and after staying out all night returned in the 1 4 Col. Doc. ioio, ion.

morning with a verdict of not guilty, at which the account says Atwood was very angry, that he refused to receive the verdict and sent them out again; that after remain ing out for six hours they returned and again rendered a verdict of not guilty. At this, the account continues, the Judge " grew very passionate and threatened them; that they were sent out again several times," but persisted in rendering a verdict of not guilty, upon which he threatened to fine and im prison them, which, the account says, " so alarmed the eleven Dutchmen " that, upon Atwood's demanding who among them would not agree to a verdict of guilty, they named the Englishman, when, the account states, " the Judge fell upon him with men acing language," and by " hectoring and threatening him, so managed him " that at last he gave his consent to a verdict of guilty, which being rendered, Atwood fined Baker four hundred pieces of eight, a very large amount at that period, and ordered that he should remain in the custody of the sheriff until it was paid and made such an "acknowledgment as the Lieutenant-Gover nor should think fit." 1 Atwood afterwards undertook to obviate the effect of this scandalous proceeding, not by denying anything contained in this ac count, but by stating that the witness who swore to the speaking of the words was a man of good credit, who all the jury declared they believed would not forswear himself; whereas the Englishman was of such ill fame that a jury of his own party found him in effect guilty of forgery, what ever a finding in effect may mean, and that he took with him in the jury room a law book of no authority, and by a false applica tion of it misled the jury.2 When it was ascertained that Lord Cornbury was appointed, the anti-Leislerian party, of whom Col. Nicholas Bayard was the leader, 1 4 Col. Doc. 8 10, 957 N. Y. Hist. Soc. Col. for 1880, p. 282. ' N.Y. Hist. Soc. Col. for 1881, 282.