Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 07.pdf/468

 London Legal Letter.

43i

LONDON LEGAL LETTER. London, Aug. 1, 1895. THE law of the bag has never been set out in print in this country or, so far as I am aware, in America. May I therefore give it pub licity in the forum of The Green Bac, the place of all places where it should first appear? It may be retorted that the bag has no law, which of course is true; but only in the sense and to the extent in which it may be said that the relations between solicitors and barristers are not matters of law. Custom governs them, and it is custom and not law which provides the limitations upon the intercourse between client and counsel, and the garb which a barrister shall wear when in court, and how he shall comport himself in his social meetings with " the other branch of the profession," and the amount and the manner of the payment of his fees, as well as scores of other things more or less important in the daily life of an English lawyer. But this custom has all the weight and authority of law, and doubtless, if oc casion should arise, would be construed as if it were law. In the first place, then, only barristers use bags; and by bags are generally understood the stuffgoods bags of the pattern which adorns the titlepage of this magazine. Solicitors go about with leather hand-bags which are sold in the portman teau shops as " brief-bags." The stuff bags are to be procured only at the quaint, Dickens-looking wig-shops in the various alleys and courtyards of the Inns of Court. In the next place, and with all due deference to the Green Bag, there are only two colors known in stuff bags — blue and red. The blue bag is used exclusively by juniors, and a junior is one who has not " taken silk," or, in other words, become a Q. C. As many able barristers do not care to take silk, there are hun dreds of gray-haired juniors. All Queen's Coun sel use red bags, but all who use red bags are not Queen's Counsel. This sounds a good deal like the Athanasian Creed, and is, perhaps, quite as comprehensible; but I may make it plainer by saying that the blue bag is used almost exclu sively by men who have been only a comparatively

few years at the bar. While a Q. C. has the red bag by virtue of his position, the junior has it only by favor, and by favor of the Q. G. If a junior in a case in which he is led by a Queen's Counsel attracts the attention of his leader and gives him commendable assistance, the Q. C. may, if he likes, present the junior with a red bag; but in such a case the bag is sent to the chambers of the junior by the Q. C.'s clerk, who is ex pected to receive a guinea for the favor — as his perquisite. Thenceforward the junior will carry his own bag, as it has changed color; whereas a small boy or a clerk was necessary as a bearer of the blue bag. Such, in brief, is the law of the bag. It may be childish and absurd, particularly in the eyes of Americans, but so are many other of the customs which have grown up in the Temple dur ing the past three or four hundred years, and not even the most radical of modern reformers would care to abolish them. The Society of Co-operative Legislation, in which it is hoped all English-speaking people will take an interest, has now got fairly to work — at least it has begun to map out a programme of work, and there is no doubt that the programme will be well carried out. Sub-committees have been appointed on (a) Eorms and Methods of Legislation; (6) Mercantile Law; (7) Com parative and Historical Jurisprudence; (//) Pro cedure, and (/) Foreign and Colonial Correspon dence. The names of those who have agreed to serve on these committees embrace eminent bar risters and solicitors, text-book writers and uni versity professors. Many of them are well known in America, as, for instance, Lord Davey, Professor Thos. Erskine Holland, professor of international law at Oxford; Sir Courtenay Ilbert; Sir Wm. R. Mason, Warden of All Souls, Oxford; Judge Chalmers; Arthur Cohen, Q. C.; I-ord Justice Lindley; Master Macdonnel; Mr. Justice Mat thew; Dr. Stubbs; Professor Dicey; Professor Jenks; Professor Maitland; Sir F. Pollock; Ix>rd Watson; Professor Westlake; I/jrd Justice Rigby; Lord Shand, and Mr. Justice Wright. The com mittees have met and each has taken up one or two subjects upon which certain members of the