er lay dead in a room in the court, from an apoplectic attack, it is surmised. Had he lived he would have had to undergo his sentence forthwith, as there is here no appeal in criminal cases, and thus there is avoided the years of delay which might have been secured elsewhere by successive appeals and revisals and demands for new trial.

The pathos of the tragedy is further illustrated by the circumstance that the attorney general who had refused to prosecute Whitaker Wright justified his position before Parliament a few days after the trial had been concluded. He contended that according to the provisions of the statute upon which the prisoner was indicted there must not only have been misrepresentation in a balance sheet or other document issued by the officials of a company, but that the misrepresentation must have been with the intent to deceive or defraud shareholders or creditors or to induce persons to entrust or advance property to the company, and that as in this case the false balance sheet was issued solely with intent to better the company and its shareholders, the offence was not one within the meaning of the act. He quoted an authority which, strange to say, was not brought to the attention of the learned judge who tried Whitaker Wright. It was that of Lord Chief Justice Cockburn, who in a similar case directed a jury that they could not convict unless they were satisfied that the acts charged were done with the fraudulent purpose of defrauding the shareholders and the creditors of the company. Had the dicta been quoted at the recent trial it is not improbable that it would have had a very different result.

Comparisons are often made between the fees of counsel in England and America, and with unsatisfactory results as it is difficult to find relative standard by which to measure upon the result. In this country a firm lawyers would take entire charge of such a

any

case as Whitaker Wright's and have the sole conduct of it from start to finish, and would probably charge a fee to cover the entire work performed based in some measure upon the result. In this country a firm of solicitors is employed to prepare the case for trial, but upon each hearing before the magistrate and at the trial counsel are retained, the solicitors usually briefing the ablest and most skilful their clients means will afford. In the Whitaker Wright trial thousands of pounds were doubtless spent by both sides in getting the case ready. Part of this money was "out of pockets" for the services of accountants and scriveners, but profit costs of the solicitors must have been very large. It is commonly reported that Mr. Rufus Isaacs, K. C., who with Mr. Avery, K. C., and Mr. Emery Stephenson conducted the prosecution, had 500 guineas, say $2,500 marked upon his brief, with a daily refresher of 100 guineas, which would make his compensation for the actual court work $8,500. In the usual course Mr. Avery would receive a fee of two-thirds the amount of Mr. Rufus Isaac's fee, and Mr. Stephenson's fee would amount to two-thirds of Mr. Avery's fee. If this system was followed, and there is no reason to believe it was not, Mr. Avery received $5,600 and Mr. Stephenson $3,600, or a total of approximately $18,000 for the three counsels. Mr. Ranson Walker is said to have had no less than 3000 guineas marked on his brief for the defence, but this was, to at least 2000 guineas, a "special" fee and his associates would not, therefore, receive the same proportiona! amounts. However, it is not improbable that the defendants counsels were paid something more, and probably considerably more, than $25,000 for their services. These figures are given simply for comparative purposes.

STUFF GOWN.

T

HE early laws of Puritan Massachusetts possessed an almost Draconian severity. In some cases there was a fixed and definite penalty, but in most instances the question of sentence was left to the discretion of a hard and relentless judiciary. The laws relating to idlers, thieves, agnostics, and drunkards are given in detail here, and the reader will see that justice was seldom, if ever, tempered with mercy.

The law as to idle and disorderly persons was as follows: "Idlers. It is ordered that no person, householder or others, shall spend his time unprofitably, under pain of such punishment as the county court shall think meet to inflict. And the constables of every town are required to use special care to take notice of offenders of this kind, especially common coasters, tobacco takers, and unprofitable fowlers, and present the same to the next magistrate."

The law as to heretics and agnostics was especially severe: "Any one denying the Scriptures to be the word of God, should. pay not exceeding £50, to be severely whipped, not exceeding forty strokes, unless he publicly recant, in which case he shall not

pay above £10, or be whipped in case he pay not the fine. And if the said offender after his recantation, sentence or execution, shall the second time publish and obstinately and pertinaciously maintain the same wicked opinion, he shall be banished or put to death, as the court shall judge."

The court sentences of thieves and drunkards, which are given below, are extremely interesting.

"Sergeant Perkins is ordered to carry forty turfs to the fort for being drunk."

"Josiah Plaistow, for stealing four baskets of corn from the Indians, is ordered to return them eight baskets, and to be fined £5, and hereafter to be called Josias, and not Mr. Josiah Plaistow, as he formerly used to be."

"John Wedgewood, for being in the company of drunkards, to be set in the stocks."

"April, 1632, Robert Coles is fined £10, and enjoined to stand with a white sheet of paper on his back, wherein a drunkard shall be written in great letters, so long as the court shall think best, for abusing himself shamefully with drink."

Such were some of the laws of our Puritan ancestors.

K

SINGLE NUMBERS 50 CENTS.

The Editor will be glad to receive contributions of articles of moderate length upon subjects of interest to the profession; also anything in the way of legal antiquities or curiosities, facetiæ, anecdotes, etc.

NOTES.

THE prisoner at the bar, a small negro boy fourteen years of age, was charged with murder, it being alleged that by the administration of poison he had caused the death of his mother and father. He entered a plea of "not guilty," but the State made out its case beyond any shadow of a doubt and the accused was convicted of murder. On account of his tender years, the jury saw fit to recommend him to the mercy of the court. When presented for sentence, being asked by the presiding judge, if he had anything to say why the sentence of the court should not be passed upon him, the boy with a broad grin and a twinkle in his eyes, unhesitatingly responded:

"Jedge, all I got to say is, have mussy on me caise I's a orphan."

The poor orphan was sentenced to the State prison for the term of his natural life time.

HONORABLE HENRY A. CHILDS is known throughout New York State as one of the most dignified and learned judges on the bench. At a recent term of court he was very much annoyed because the officer who was stationed just inside the court room door found the enjoyment of a short nap, now and then, much more to his liking than listening to the arguments of the lawyers and the rulings of the Court.

One day a well known attorney was about to leave the court room. Court was in ses

sion, and the officer was stealing a nap as usual, but awoke just in time to hear the judge say in most strenuous tones, "Mr. M—————, if you are going from this court room you will please do so very quietly so as not to disturb the officer at the door."

DURING the progress of the Goddard murder case, in Kansas City, Missouri, some years ago, a colored witness for defendant was on the stand, who testified that he was in the chicken business, and had been in a certain vicinity on the night in question. Defendant's attorney asked this witness what he was doing there.

Here the prosecuting attorney interrupted very gently, saying, "I wouldn't ask him that, he said he was in the chicken business."

A FOREIGN born citizen of one of the middle Western States, Pakowski by name, was on trial charged with killing fish by the use of dynamite. He had been seen with the fish in his possession, but insisted that they had been killed by some one else, and that he had found them dead upon the water. As proof of his entire innocence of taking the lives of these fish he explained that they had been dead so long that some of them had an unsavory ador.

In response to a question upon cross-examination, he stated that he was taking them home to feed his family. The prosecuting officer thought he saw an opportunity to make a telling point with the jury.

"Do you mean to tell this jury?” he asked, "that you were taking home these dead fish that you have told us about to be eaten by yourself and your family?"

"Vell," slowly came the answer, "I never yet eat fish vhat vas not dead."

THE following is a literal transcript of the second clause of a will filed and probated in L. county, Wisconsin, a few years since:

"I hereby commit the guardianship of all my children until they shall respectively attain the age of twenty-one years, unto my said wife, during her life; and from and after her decease unto my much and esteemed iriend his executors and assigns."

A RATHER pat saying is applied to a certain lawyer, who, when elevated to the bench, failed to satisfy the expectations of members of the bar, and one of them remarked of him "that he went upon the bench with litthe opposition from the bar and left it with none."

V. SUED S. & F. for raising the waters of O., a meandered lake, so that it overflowed and washed away his land and otherwise invaded his raparian rights. R., attorney for defendants was, because of limited education, rather uncertain in his use of words, while false teeth, which did not fit, rendered his pronunciation indistinct. He was very indignant over what he called the "frivyla" character of the suit.

While the case was on trial an attorney from a neighboring town asked R. what the suit was about. He answered: "It involve' the location of the miranda' line' on O. Lake and right' of the riprarin' ownas. I weesh we c'd dreen the lake as dry as the Dese't of Ohary."

AN able, but impractical, lawyer at the Kansas City bar retired from political office not long ago, taking with him the confirmed habit of poker playing in lieu of the excellent law practice lost to him while holding political office. His sense of humor, however, was in no wise dulled thereby.

Dropping in, one day, to visit a fellow lawver with little less leisure than himself, he greeted him with the usual question about business affairs. "Poor with me, very poor," was the reply; "and every cent, in fact, that

I do make in the practice of law, I lose playing poker, it seems."

"Well, same condition here, old fellow," was the response; "only,-every cent I make playing poker, I lose practising law."

WILLIAM H. PARSONS, the lawyer (says the New York Times), tells this story at the expense of members of his own profession.

A burglar returned empty handed to his pal, who had been watching on the outside. for him while he entered a likely looking house.

"What did you get, Bill?" the pal asked. "Nothing. It was a lawyer's house," was the reply.

"Did you lose anything?"

"No. I didn't stay long enough."

I ONCE heard a Lord Chancellor tactfully relieve the situation, when a learned counsel had remained standing silent at the Bar for perhaps ten minutes, while judicial scintillations issued continually from the various members of the House, by saying, in the blandest manner, "My Lords, perhaps it would now be well to allow Mr. A. to proceed with his argument before us, instead of pursuing our arguments before him!”

An absolutely justifiable reply by a Scots counsel was once made in the House of Lords in the days before that House as an appellate tribunal was limited to "high judicial" persons. The case related to rights in water. The Scots counsel alluded again and again, in his strong vernacular, to what he called "watter." An English peer interposed thus: "Tell me, Mr. C., do you in Scotland spell 'water' with two t's?" The admirable answer came back like a flash: "No, my lord. In Scotland we spell 'watter' wi' ae t, but we spell 'mainers' wi' twa n's." Under cover of conveying information as to the supposed peculiarities of Scots spelling, Mr. C. delivered a well merited rebuke as to the "mainers" displayed by the English interrogator. The Solicitor-General for Scotland in The Juridical Review.

NEW LAW BOOKS.

At

It is the intention of The Green Bag to have its book reviews written by competent reviewers. The usual custom of magazines is to confine book notices to books sent in for review. the request of subscribers, however, The Green Bag will be glad to review or notice any recently published law book, whether received for review or not.

CASES ON CRIMINAL LAW. By William E. Mikell, Assistant Professor of Law in the University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia: International Printing Company. 1902, 1903. Two parts. Cloth. (983 pp.)

Occasional passages from old authorities, such as Bracton, Britton, the Year Books, and Coke, give this collection a proper connection with the past; but the collection is well fitted for class-room use as a practical introduction to current Criminal Law. As in all case books prepared for the use of students, head notes are omitted. Yet through the table of contents, the table of cases reprinted, and the index, the book is as well adapted to the use of the practitioner as circumstances permit. The arrangement begins with general considerations, namely: sources of the Criminal Law, the elements of crime, the criminal intent, negligence as supplying intent, intent as affected by conditions (including ignorance or mistake of law and of fact, infancy, insanity, intoxication, and incorporation), the criminal act, combinations of persons in crime, assault, battery and mayhem; and then the plan proceeds to the development of the peculiarities of specific crimes. The list of topics, it will be noticed, while omitting pleading and procedure, covers practically the whole of the substantive law. As there are other important collections of cases on Criminal Law, it is interesting to notice that this is an independent collection and distinctly an honest piece of work.

FIRE INSURANCE. By George A. Clement. New York: Baker, Voorhis, and Company. 1903. (pp. xcviii+637.)

The scope of this book is well indicated by its full title: "Fire Insurance as a valid

contract in event of fire and as affected by construction and waiver, estoppel and adjustment of claims thereunder." In other words, the book omits insurable interest, non-disclosure, misrepresentation, warranty, and express conditions as to validity, all of which topics have been treated often and adequately, and devotes itself to the other and equally important half of the subject, loss or damage, statement of proof of loss and other requirements or conditions precedent to loss becoming due and payable, the options of the insurance company, apportionment of the loss, payment of the loss, subrogation, limitation as to suit or action on policy, waiver and estoppel, and construction and interpretation of the fire insurance contract. There are also forms and statutory provisions. The book is apparently intended for the use of insurance men, and especially for adjusters, quite as much as for lawyers. Its rules are often taken from the standard policies, and these can hardly be called propositions of law. To the lawyer an especially interesting feature of the book is the practical discussion. of the mode of computing and apportioning a loss.

by William Mack and Howard P. Nash. Vols. IX. New York: The American Law Book Company. 1903. (998 pp.) ANNUAL ANNOTATIONS. (1 to 9 Cyc.) 1903.

The most important articles in Volume IX. are those on Contracts by Professor John Davison Lawson, Dean of the Law Department of the University of Missouri, and on Copyright, edited by Edmund Wetmore, formerly President of the American Bar Association. This volume also covers the subjects Contempt, Continuances in Civil Cases, Contribution, Conversion, Convicts and Coroners.

With this volume also comes Annual Annotations, 1903, a a book of nearly five hundred pages which, as the editors say in the preface, brings the first nine volumes of the Cyclopedia down to the present date.