Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 21.pdf/219

 198

The Green Bag

USELESS, BUT ENTERTAINING

A New York lawyer recently filed a petition in bankruptcy giving his liabilities as $277,116.29 and his cash assets as $1.33. —Law Notes. A lawyer once asked a man who had at various times sat on several juries: "Who influenced you most—the lawyers, the wit nesses, or the judge?" He expected to get some useful and interesting information from so experienced a juryman. This was the man's reply. "I'll tell yer, sir, 'ow I makes up my mind. I'm a plain man, and a reasonin' man, and I ain't influenced by anything the lawyers say, nor by what the witnesses say, no, nor by what the judge says. I just looks at the man in the docks and I says, 'if he ain't done nothing, why's he there?' And I brings 'em all in guilty."—The Bar.

THE LAWYER'S HARD LOT Joax—His life is full of trials. Hoax—Indeed! Joax—Yes; he's a lawyer.—Brooklyn Eagle. A burglar, who had entered a minister's house at midnight, was disturbed by the waking of the occupant of the room he was in. Drawing his knife he said : "If you stir you are a dead man. I'm hunt ing for money." "Let me get up and strike a light," said the minister, "and I ll hunt with you." —Law Student's Helper.

Uncle Mose, needing money, sold his pig to the wealthy Northern lawyer who had just bought the neighboring plantation. After a time, needing more money, he stole the pig and resold it, this time to Judge Pickens, who lived "down the road a piece." Soon afterward the two gentlemen met and, upon comparing notes, suspected what had hap pened. They confronted Uncle Mose. The old darky cheerfully admitted his guilt. "Well," demanded Judge Pickens, "what are you going to do about it?" "Blessed ef I know, Jedge," replied Uncle Mose with a broad grin. "I'se no lawyer. I reckon I'll have to let yo' two gen'men settle it between yo'selves."— Everybody's.

Correspondence

"CONSERVATISM IN PROCEDURE" To the Editor of the Green Bag:— Dear Sir: I am in receipt of the March num ber of the Green Bag, and have read with a good deal of interest Mr. Frederick W. Lehmann's article on "Conservatism in Legal Pro cedure," in which he refers to some Texas verdicts and the discussion of the higher courts in regard to them. He might with equal pertinence have reviewed the holdings of the Texas courts on some indict ments. While Texas has taken a long step forward in regard to the necessary allegations in indict ments for murder and other kindred offenses,

her Court of Criminal Appeals still follows the old-time unreasonable technicalities with ref erence to indictments for some other offenses, and with reference to some of the formal parts of indictments. In the case of Thomas v. The State, 18 Tex. App. 220, the commence ment of the indictment is as follows:— "In the name and by the authority of the State of Texas: The grand Jurors in and for the County of Freestone and State of Texas, duly elected, tried, impaneled, sworn and charged in the District Court of said Free stone County, Texas, at its February Term, A. D. 1884, diligently to inquire into and true presentment make of all offenses com mitted within the County of Freestone against