Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 21.pdf/88

 An Informal Code of Legal Ethics ease; and that it should not be neces sary to placard on the walls of the room a rule in large letters that an attorney, when taking a seat inside the bar, shall not pile his feet upon the table in front of him and expose his manners and per son. We assume that a printed rule of practice is not necessary to inform the judge and lawyer after a case has been argued and submitted in open court that it is improper for them on the out side and not in the presence of the opposition to have a confidential talk about the subject-matter in controversy, because, in fact, each one knows intui tively, although as a matter of courtesy he may refrain from saying so, that the other, outwardlv appearing righteous unto men, is piaying the rdle of the hypocrite. A rule of court is not necessary to inform the judge and lawyers that they should imitate the example of other people in other walks of life and be polite in their professional intercourse with each other; and that although they are not what might be termed a mutual admiration society, still for the sake of example, pro bono publico, and for the more convenient dispatch of business, they should each at all times try to be a Chesterfield and never at any time in open court express their real feelings about each other. The lawyer in the courtroom can assume a supercilious and contemptu ous manner that will be embarrassing to his Honor and make him feel lone some and uncomfortable; and, on the other hand, when the attorney has clearly crossed the Rubicon and is wan tonly trespassing on the dignity of the Court, the judge can by summary pro ceedings at once institute his own Huntington, West Virginia.

71

action, become judge in his own case, and send the attorney where he will naturally feel homesick. The good judge, in order to avoid any unseemly wrangle in the courtroom, will not talk too much nor give too many reasons for his rulings. In cases of grave doubt he will simply look wise and say nothing. He knows that "a fool uttereth all his mind; but a wise man keepeth it in till afterwards"—till after the Court of Appeals has enun ciated the correct rule and reasoning in the case. Again, we are not unmindful that a judge afflicted with an overbearing dis position, forgetting his own dignity and ignoring the ethics of the judiciary, is liable at times to make trouble for him self and others by losing his patience and temper, and becoming rough, if not tough, in his manners; and may thus grieve the lawyers and make them think with Shakspere's "Isabella":— O, but man, proud man! Dressed in a little brief authority; Most ignorant of what he is most assured, His glassy essence—like an angry ape, Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven, As make the angels weep. Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter. The West Virginia code and the Code of Ethics should go hand in hand with every judge and lawyer. If he is not familiar with the latter code, the one adopted by the West Vir ginia Bar Association, at their meeting held at Elkins in December, 1906, should speedily become his vade mecum. And if this code of ethics does not furnish the necessary information, let him faith fully follow the Golden Rule: "All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets."