ing, since no one knows what the law in
most civil cases is--and it truth it might as well be one way as
the other. A noted member of the supreme bench of the United States
is reported to have said that when he was chief justice of one of
the State courts, and he and his confreres found themselves in a
quandary over the law, they were accustomed to send the sergeant-
at-arms for what they called the "implements of decision"--a brace
of dice and a copper cent. Thus the weightiest matters were decided
without difficulty.

Now, the taking of a purse out of a lady's reticule does not present
much confusion as a legal proposition. It would be somewhat
difficult to persuade a judge or a jury that picking a pocket is
not a crime. It is far easier to demonstrate that the pocket was
not picked at all. This is generally only a question of money.
Witnesses can easily be secured to swear either that the lady had
no reticule, or that if she had a reticule it contained no purse,
or that some person other than the defendant took the purse, or
that she herself dropped it, or that even if the prisoner took it
he had no criminal intent in so doing, since he observed that it
was about to slip from the receptacle in which it was contained
and intended but to return it to her. Lastly, if put to it, that
in fact the owner was _no lady_, and therefore unworthy of credence.

Few persons realize how difficult it is for an outsider, such as
an ordinary juryman, to decide an issue of fact. A flat denial is
worth a hundred ingenious defences in which the act is admitted
but the attempt is made to explain it away. It is this that gives
the jury so much trouble in criminal cases. For example, in the
case of the pickpocket the lawyers and the judge may know that the
complaining witness is a worthy woman, the respectable mother of
a family, and that the defendant is a rascal. But each comes before
the jury presumably of equal innocence. She says he did, he says
he didn't. The case must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Generally the defendant's word, so far as the jury can see, is as
good as his accuser's. If there are other witnesses it is usually
not difficult, and certainly not impossible, to show that they have
poor eyesight, bad memories, or are undesirable citizens in general.
The criminal lawyer learns in his cradle never to admit anything.
By getting constant adjournments he wears out the People's witnesses,
induces others t