inventions rather than by the cogency of their logic. I appeal to my
friend, the sage of Cattaraugus, who has a large knowledge of the
customs of the sex, if this be not the usual result.

Not to cut the reply of the deacon too short, I go on to remark that
whether he agrees with me or not, neither he nor any other well-balanced
man would have descended, on the trial of so important a case as the one
we are discussing, to a trivial playing upon words. Even my friend, the
district attorney, than whom no man is more remorselessly given--in
private life--to the depraved habit of quibbling, and who never
hesitates to impale truth upon the point of a verbal criticism, would by
the temptation of a fee commensurate with the vigor of the moral effort
required, have discussed the question on broader and truer principles.
Had he been retained on the part of Antonio, he would have proved
himself equal to the occasion, and have unfolded a logical and
consistent answer to the claim of the plaintiff.

He would have boldly attacked the bond itself, as absolutely void in its
inception, because it was aimed at the life of a citizen of Venice, and
would have called upon the court to abrogate a contract which violated
the very laws that the court was bound to administer. With his usual
eloquence, he would have urged that a penalty so illegal, immoral, and
monstrous, and which involved the commission of the highest crime,
except treason, known to the laws of the state, could never be enforced
in a civilized country. He would have offered to the court no woman's
quibble like that of Portia, based upon the assumption that the penalty
of a bond which sanctioned a high and capital crime could be enforced in
a court of law; and in fine, would have addressed an argument to the
reason and understanding of the court which might render a consideration
of this case by the tribunal unnecessary.

But no good plea to the plaintiff's cause of action was made on the
trial, and the court was, and I fear that the whole world has been
deceived by Portia's subterfuge. We must, therefore, regard Shylock as a
badly used man. After all, he was no worse than many creditors and note
shavers of this day, who _only_ demand the life blood of their victims,
and if on the pleas before the court he was entitled to judgment, like
them he should have had it. Doubtless in private life Shylock was a very
honest and well-behaved gentleman, not a mere mountebank as he is