Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 18.pdf/495

 462

THE GREEN BAG

momentarily turned towards the defendant, equity had hold of the ink well on the court's desk, and all but let him have. But it is well that equity follows the law. II. Too, it may be remembered that the defendant's counsel has given unexampled attention to his side of the case, never once forgetting that there was a counterclaim before the court for slandering his client. And only once did he accentuate his pro nunciation of the first name of his opposing counsel syllable by syllable, by pausing unduly between them, viz., NUT-TY—TON. III. So, that, with the exception of cer tain conduct of the jury, or a part thereof at least, — which will be discussed later herein, — the maxim involved in this case had never a better chance to demonstrate the nature of equity as a follower of the law. IV. The maxim does not mean, however, that equity goes on behind the law, — tags it. It means that equity is not a law unto itself, whether or no (and no thanks to the law either). In the first stages of the case at bar the defendant moved for a continu ance on account of the absence of an impor tant witness. His motion was not properly stated; but it seemed to this court that he was entitled to that witness. While over ruling the motion because the law demanded it, the equity of this court followed the tactics of the plaintiff with an eagle eye. The court takes the view that if the maxim has any application at all to the above situation in the proceeding, it is fully sustained by the case of Ruse v. Aquaton, 19 The Great Wall of China, 121. V. And when the demurrer came up on behalf of the plaintiff, equity was still on the watch. While this court might have sus tained the demurrer, and compelled the defendant to reduce his $100 counterclaim at least one cent, to come within the juris diction, or appeal, which this court did not think would be done, equity was satisfied that the two hundred pounds of averdupois of counsel for plaintiff would appeal, and

thus give the defendant time to get his witness. VI. It was unfortunate that the litigants in this case were not able to keep the nature of the business out of which the stock trans action grew in the background until the personnel of the court as a full and complete court had become too fatigued to take any lively interest in the proceeding. If plaintiff's counsel had not been laboring under the inconvenience of a bad cold, there is no knowing what might have hap pened. But fearing that he had no voice at all, to speak of save to whisper of, he whispered in a manner that could be heard a half a mile. And it was while whispering about the value of the pumps the corpora tion had been making, that the constable inadvertently stole into the judges' chambers with the pump marked "Exhibit B." Bowles aspirated the statement that there were a million of those pumps in constant use all day and until the quiet hours of the morning between Davenport, state of Iowa, and Milwaukee, state of Wisconsin, in clusive, and that several went to New England. VII. Drinkwater's evidence tended to rebut this, and his counsel retorted to Mr. Bowles that two bullfrogs in a 3 by 6 pond always sounded like a million, and called attention to the fact that the plaintiff had failed to produce evidence that there had been any such number sold; that while there had been the aggregate sum of two shipped to the state of Maine.they had bsen returned as unmarketable because of the name stamped just below the pressure indicator. VIII. But this court does not intend to be led away by interest in the details of the evidence and arguments with reference to the working and usefulness of the pump as a basis for claiming a value to the stock. And in adverting to the misrepresentations claimed by defendant, Drinkwater, to avoid the element of mutuality in the contract. the court will venture a definition of equity