Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 20.pdf/709

 542

THE GREEN BAG

their brethren at the Chancery Bar. But if they were not quite on a par in culture, they were more than their equals in knowledge of the law of evidence and of the art of crossexamination. Their addresses to juries were bright and to the point. A Common Law Q. C. in those days was rarely tedious. The exception proves the rule. A Leader on Mr. Hawkins's own Circuit (the Western Circuit), who died many years ago, was addressing the Court for the defense, with repetitions, many and oft, when the stage whisper of the prisoner was heard through the Court — "Who is that d d dreamy duffer? " This anecdote is so entirely in keeping with Lord Brampton's Reminiscences that it may be recorded here. .He was -himself a past master in the art of managing a jury, and of cross-examining the other side. He tells us how he was brought into the Court of the Master of the Rolls (Lord Romilly) and how ungracious a wel come he received from his Leader, Mr. Jessell, Q. C., who subsequently succeeded Lord Romilly at the Rolls and became one of the greatest chancery judges of the nineteenth century. Mr. Hawkins proceeded with his cross-examination (undismayed by his Lead er's sneers) with the result that he not only won the case for his clients but caused Lord Romilly to say — " Little as I value crossexamination generally, I must say that the cross-examination of Mr. Hawkins much struck me." Where did he learn to be so consummate an advocate? Let that ques tion be answered by himself — "The Criminal Court was the best school in which to learn your work of cross-exami nation and examination-in-chief, while the Courts of Equity were probably the worst." "If you would know the world," writes Lord Brampton, "you must not confine your self to its virtues." No one can accuse Lord Brampton of having made that mistake. The prize fight on Frimley Common is recorded by him. The victorious pugilist killed his opponent and was indicted for manslaughter.

He was fortunate enough to secure Mr. Hawkins as his counsel, and was acquitted. The case was tried before Mr. Justice Parke. We are only interested in quoting Lord Brampton's comment on the result: "Parke did his utmost to obtain a conviction, but reason and good sense were too much for him." Instead of "reason and good sense" Lord Brampton should have written "Mr. Hawkins was too much for him." The Socialists are fond of using the phrase "the idle rich." It is not a charitable nor an accurate expression, but it becomes less inaccurate when we couple it with "the idle poor." The idle rich and the idle poor have much in common, and may fairly be called the pillars of that mighty institution — the Turf. In this connection they may be called "the great Twin Brethren." It is difficult for a foreigner to appreciate the large place that racing fills in the minds of the upper and lower classes. In 1894 the Prime Min ister of the United Kingdom, and the owner of the winner of the Derby (Ladas) were one and the same person. The Derby happened to be run that year two days after the Fourth of June, the great holiday in the Eton Cal endar. The Provost of Eton wished the most distinguished of Old Etonians present (Lord Rosebery) "success in his recreations and his pleasures as well as in his severer labors." That the Head of the most famous school in England should cpngratulate the Prime Minister on the possession of a "four-legged gambling machine" surprised many (including the owner of Ladas), but it proves the hold which the Turf and its tri umphs have on the upper classes. So many cases come before the Courts that are in some way connected with a horse, that the tradition ran that one judge on the Com mon Law side at Westminster owed his appointment to his knowledge of horseflesh. If Mr. Hawkins was as quick to seize all the weak points of a horse as he was of a man, he must indeed have stood in the front rank of sportsmen. The only book he is reported to have studied in his leisure hours was The