Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 16.pdf/155

 •

114

Green Bag.

A WITNESS in a Wisconsin court was asked recently: "Well, how about Corry Brothers, as a financial success?" "As a financial success," replied the wit ness, "Corry Brothers was a great failure.1' IN a jury trial at Los Angeles recently, the attorney for the * defendant started in to read to the jury from a certain volume of the Supreme Court Reports. He was interrupted by the Court, who said: "Colonel , it is not admissable, you know, to read law to the jury." "Yes, I un derstand, your Honor; I am only reading to the jury a decision of the Supreme Court." HONORABLE HENRY COLLINGS is one of the common pleas judges of the second sub division of the Seventh Judicial District of Ohio, and was presiding at a term of that court in Lawrence County. W. D. Cross is a prominent and able young attorney of the bar of that county. In a cause pending in that court, in which Mr. Cross appeared for the defendant, after his sundry motions and demurrer to the plaintiffs' petition had been overruled, and plaintiffs' demurrer to his answer had been sustained, Mr. Cross said: "Well, your honor, if plaintiff's pleadings arc good against all my attacks by motion and demurrer, and my pleading will not stand his first attack, what am I to do?" Judge Collings—"Hire a lawyer, Mr. Cross." I WAS called upon some years ago, says a Maine attorney, to defend a man who had been sued in trover for conversion of certain cedar sleepers. The case was to be tried be fore a trial justice at some distance from the shire town of the county, but T prepared my case as elaborately as possible and thought I had a most convincing defense. I had the evidence and proved that the sleepers were both paid for by the de fendant and were delivered at his exclusive landing on the river long before the plaintiff made his alleged purchase. My evidence was

¡ j '

not even denied, and I was patting myself on the back, as the clock showed the time to be advancing towards the supper hour, (after a whole day spent in the struggle with many witnesses for the plaintiff and a few for the defendant), and the plaintiff's counsel was finishing up his long-winded harangue. I thought surely the verdict could not be other than for the defendant. My nerves and whole system received a rude shock, however, when I heard the justice drawl out: "Wall, there's a heap of testimony in this case and an allfired lot of it seems to be contradict'ry, an' I've got a toothache, an' the only safe thing to do, is to give the verdict for the plaintiff and let the defendant appeal!" A YOUNG attorney had advised his client that he had a good case and had started suit and filed his declaration. The defendant put in a demurrer to the same which was argued before the venerable Judge Gary of Chicago. After hearing the arguments the jiulge notified the parties that he would sustain the demurrer, whereupon the young at torney for the plaintiff said, "In that case, your Honor, I ask leave to amend." The judge replied, "It won't do you any good, for upon your own statement of the facts you have no case." But the attorney insisted, saying. "Your Honor, I must amend, I must amend. What will I tell my client?" Judge Gary leaned forward in his quiet manner and whispered, "You tell your client that Judge Gary is an old fool." ON another occasion before the same judge, a young attorney was making some noise in the back part of the court room and was moving around as though in search of something. Judge Gary called him by name and asked what the trouble was, whereupon the young man stated that he had lost his overcoat. The judge replied, "Now see here, some men have lost whole suits in this court and have not made one-half the fuss about it that von have."