Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 19.pdf/355

 328

THE GREEN BAG

money and spent it. You will get your judg ment against me in due course of the law," and it was done, and stands against the broker yet. To have held the money against the principal would have been a criminal offense. The garnishment made it a simple debt to garnishing creditor, and broker got amount of judgment and ten per cent on it. A Strong Line. — Judge: With what instru ment or article did your wife inflict those wounds on your face and head? Micky: Wid a motty, yer Honor. Judge: A what? Micky: A motty — wan av thim frames wid " God Bliss Our Home " in it. Expert Testimony. — In Hirschils Trial Tactics, the author says, " When experts are put in they should be given to understand that they should make themselves plain to the jury. In a recent case a physician was called to give evidence in regard to a certain injury, and the testimony of the physician was as follows: ' Anterior to the right parietal emin ence running parallel with the conorary suture into the squamous portion of the temporal bone, there is a fracture of the bone as long and wide as the finger. Its edges run parallel to each other and are slightly arched with the convexivity posterior; the anterior is sharp, the posterior depressed. ■■ On the inner surface of the skull the vitreous table is detached and the diTra lacerated. In addition there is found between the latter and the internal meninges a thick layer of blood coagula.' It appeared that the subject had been kicked in the head by a horse." Related. — Since we, in the United States, have begun to look up our ancestors so that we can join the Sons of the Revolution and similar societies, we have become more or less familiar with great-uncles, second cousins, and the like, but some of our adopted citizens are still a little ahead of us on relationship. This is illustrated by the following answers made by witnesses in court., "Are you related to the defendant?" counsel, asked of a witness whose replies were being interpreted from the Yiddish.

"Yes, I am related," was the prompt reply. "How are you related?" "My wife's brother is married to the defendant's sister-in-law." And again; it was an Irishman this time. "Are you related to the plaintiff?" "Sure, I am. That is, I think I am." ' '•' In what way are you related?" "My father and his father were fourth cousins." Shocking. — "I am sorry," he said to the conveyancer as he laid a deed on the desk, "but my wife won't stand for this." " Why not? It's all right. We compared the descrip tion with great care and we have been over the whole deed and it is in the usual form." "Well," said the client, " there isn't but one letter wrong that I know of, but you just look at that acknowledgment clause." It read as the conveyancer rapidly ran through it, " Then personally appeared the above named Mary Jones and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be her free act and deed." Then he read it a second time and found to his horror that the typewriter had struck a " k " instead of an " m " in writing the word " named." Damages. — He had had a serious accident and had told his attorney all about its general features- and they were getting down to the details of the damages. "And how much," asked the lawyer, " was your doctor's bill?" "I didn't have a doctor," was the answer, "but I took five bottles of swamp root." Identification Complete. — Some humor was interjected into a case in a magistrate's court in Germantown. Two local lawyers were rep resenting plaintiff and defendant, and became excited and somewhat personal in their argu ment. Matters proceeded to such a pitch that the lawyers began to call each other names. "You're an ass," said one to the other. "You're a liar! " was the quick retort of the opposing attorney. Then the magistrate, in a very dignified manner, said, " Now that the counsel have identified each other, kindly proceed to the disputed points." — Philadel phia Record.