Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 09.pdf/253

 224

The attorney is undistinguished by dress from "the madding crowd," while counsel is clothed in wig, and gown, and bands, the insignia of his order. The attorney "in structs" counsel, but counsel follows the instructions only just so far as he pleases, the whole conduct of the cause from the mo ment at which the "brief" is delivered resting wholly in the discretion of the coun sel. Counsel in court always speak of each other as " my learned friend," but never so speak of the attorney who instructs them; and even attorneys, speaking in the inferior courts in which they have audience, never presume to make use of the word " learned" in referring to each other, "my friend" being the nearest approximation to the language of the bar permissible to them. An attorney is stationary, practicing in the city or town in which he and his family reside, while the barrister (if practicing at common law), though having chambers and residing in London, or some other large city, attaches himself to a "circuit," and two or three times every year " goes circuit "; that is to say, he follows the judges from one assize town to another, for the trial of civil causes, or criminal cases, and is known and distin guished by the name of the circuit to which he belongs. Thus a barrister is described as " Mr. Jennings of the Northern Circuit," while an attorney has no such itinerant de scription, but is simply " Mr. Jennings of Manchester." "Respectable" is the word which marks the highest reach of the attor ney's life, while " eminent " is the honored description of the successful counsel. No one speaks of an eminent attorney or of a respectable counsel, for of course all coun sel are respectable, and of course also no attorney is. eminent. Until recently counsel on circuit never "put up " at the hotels of the assize towns (for that would have been to place them selves in contact with attorneys having business at the assizes), but took " lodgings" in private houses; and a list of " counsels'

lodgings" was, and still is, always exhibited outside the assize courts in order to show attorneys where counsels' briefs might be delivered, and consultations appointed. During the last few years this rule of eti quette has been somewhat relaxed, and now counsels' "lodgings" are occasionally, though not generally, described as of a room in one of the hotels (e. g. No. 42, Queen's Hotel), especially in such large assize towns as Liverpool or Manchester; but even there no counsel would be found at the table d'hôte, or the bar parlor or smoking room. Yet notwithstanding this "gulf" of demarcation, counsel is wholly dependent on the attorney. There is not a single thing he can do in his profession, either in court or chambers, unless " in structed" by an attorney. He could not open his lips as the advocate of his own father, or write an "opinion" for his brother without an attorney's intervention, and the selection of counsel rests with the attorney. Whom lie will he instructs and whom he will he neglects. But his instruction must be by delivery of a brief, and not merely ver bal. Many a time I have seen an attorney in an emergency rush to counsel in court to instruct him to make an application or motion, but invariably he has had to prepare and deliver a "brief" as an essential req uisite of the instruction, although the brief might be only a blank sheet of brief paper, indorsed with the name of the cause, the name of the counsel, the amount of his fee, and the name of the instructing attorney. The word "brief" has a very different meaning in England from what we under stand by it here. There it is a confidential, "privileged" document — the attorney's statement of the case for the "instruction" of the counsel. It usually consists of a copy of the " pleadings" (all printed now, formerly all written), a full statement of the facts, technically called " the case," and a full statement of the "proofs," i. e. the names of the witnesses and their testimony,