Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 24.pdf/215

 186

The Green Bag

side of the house and directly across the side door, rendering this exit useless. Simon Ordinary, of course, vainly protested against this notorious taking of his land by the P.B.M., but was informed that the latter had a deed and had paid for the strip. Had the simple Simon also been an influential citizen, such open piracy would not have been attempted. Or had Simon been less simple and less law-abiding and more assertive, he might have held his ground and fence with like assurance and more force, and with some legal justification as well as moral right. But Simon was mystified and non plussed. He could not understand the situation. He knew that he had a deed of the premises, that he had been in possession some fifteen years, and that he had annually paid the taxes. He did not comprehend that a slight miscon struction of the description in his deed, and the customary careless description in his tax receipts, could furnish the necessary legal technicality to justify a notorious appropriation of what every body knew was his property. Simon Ordinary therefore appealed to the law for concrete justice. He knew that in accordance with the abstract principles of justice implanted within his soul, he was being wronged. To young Lawyer Tryem the case was perfectly clear, considering "justice in the abstract." But after instituting an action in ejectment, and becoming fa miliar with all the devious technicali ties to be confronted, he realized that there was an appreciable difference be tween concrete and abstract justice. He set forth the facts fully in his plead ing, and demanded possession and dam ages for forcible dispossession and the withholding. Captain James Somebody's answer de nied everything except that he was in

possession under a tax deed. The fact of the answer being sworn to did not, of course, require admitting anything detrimental! Technical mental reserva tions and devious misconstruction of facts would sufficiently justify only favorable allegations. It was only a pleading, anyway! The trial in the district court lasted three days. The matter ought to have been disposed of in about as many hours. In England the hours would probably have been ample. Mr. Stikatem, Captain Somebody's seasoned old lawyer, understood about legal technicalities. He knew he stood no show whatever with the jury. It was absolutely necessary to get technical error into the record, so as to get a reversal on appeal and wear out the plaintiff by protracted and expensive litigation. Stikatem 's extensive experience taught him to reason that the appellate auto crats in general could be trusted to find error, technical or otherwise, if within the possibilities; that they were pastmasters at the art of discovery, and were also beyond the reach of human or indi vidual considerations. So the old lawyer "played horse" with young Tryem and the trial court. The examination and cross-examination of witnesses was prolonged and reprolonged in the interest of the appellate autocrats. The presiding judge was exasperated, but also practically powerless to hasten or condense the proceedings. He, too, knew from painful experience that the eagle-eyed appellate autocrats would carefully scan the record, and if any of the innumerable court-made precedents and technicalities were strained in the interests of concrete justice, then their supreme and final interpretation of the possible value of the testimony, as well