Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 07.pdf/173

 148

and out. When the wind was in the north, this situation was found very cold, and it was pro posed to move the Court further back, to a warmer place. " But the Lord Chief Justice Bridgman," says North, " would not agree to it, as it was against Magna Charta, which says that the Common Pleas shall be held in certo loco, or in a certain place, with which the distance of an inch from that place is inconsistent, and all the pleas would be coram non judicc. That formal reason hindered a useful reform; which makes me think of Erasmus, who having read somewhat of English law, said that the lawyers were doctissimum genus indoctissimorum hominum."

FACETIÆ. Daniel C. Pomeroy was a criminal lawyer of great prominence throughout New York State, and conducted during his career the defense of thirtyseven murder cases, and not a single client ever reached the gallows. He had a son in whom he took great pride, and who promised to become a chip of the old block. The young man shortly after his admission as an attorney, thought it would be funny to "sit in" with a lawyer at a trial and assist him against the " old man." He made numerous objections during an examination of witnesses by his father, until the latter lost patience, and turning upon him said : " Dick, you either keep still after this, or I'll send for the hired girl to take you home and put you in bed." Dick subsided. Pomeroy was a stage driver on the old Butterfield line, and gleaned his legal education largely upon the box seat of his coach or while change of horses was being made at the stations. He was associated with others in defense of one Mrs. McCarty, on her trial at Utica for the murder of a man named Hall, of Ogdensburg, who was killed by a bullet from her revolver, which was aimed at another man. Judge Doolittle presided at the trial, and seemed to believe in the prison er's guilt. The Judge was bitter, and so was Pomeroy. The latter made an objection and in sisted upon it rather strenuously. " Mr. Pomeroy," said the Judge, " I am not a horse, and can't be driven.'.' " Well, your Honor, I learned in my early experience to drive mules, and I will try to keep up my former good reputation."

A Lawyer defending a promissory note case went to lunch leaving his books and citations on the table in the court-room. The opposing counsel sneaked back into the room and changed the place of all his bookmarks. In the afternoon the lawyer, taking up his books, referred the court to his authorities. His lordship noted every volume and page carefully, and took the case under consideration. In rendering his opin ion he said :— "I was inclined, after hearing the argument of counsel for defendant, to nonsuit the plaintiff : but I find, on referring to the authorities quoted by counsel, none of them bears on this case, and I am led to think that the gentleman has will fully been trying to insult the court. He has re ferred to an action of an Irishman who sued the proprietor of a monkey for damages for biting him; to a case of arson, one of burglary, two of petty larceny and three divorce cases, none of which bears on an action to recover on a promis sory note. Perhaps the grossest insult to the court is referring to ' Duckworth vs. Boozyman,' an action charging defendant with breach of promise. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs." The lawyer never knew what the matter was, and to this day thinks the judge was out of his mind. Lawyer (in a whisper) .— Here comes the jury. Ten to one they'll acquit you. Client (after listening to the verdict). — It seems to be twelve to none they don't. The following is vouched for as an actual fact. — A lecturer on Criminal I-aw at one of our law schools, in tracing the history of Criminal law, quoted : " Whosoever sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed." Genesis ix. 6. Not long afterwards a member of the class was hunting the library diligently for a copy of " Gen esis Reports." It is unnecessary to add that he was unable to find the citation under that title.

NOTES. The legal whirligig of time has brought a- curi ous revenge through the recent New York elec tion. Three years ago a young lawyer named John W. Goff, in defending an indicted client be