enced to serve thirty days in jail. He had known the
judge from boyhood, and addressed him as follows: "Bill, old boy, you're
gwine to send me ter jail, air you?"--"That's so," replied the judge;
"have you got anything to say agin it?"--"Only this, Bill: God help you
when I git out."
Daniel Webster was a clever and successful lawyer, who was engaged in
many important causes in his day. In a case in one of the Virginian
Courts he had for his opponent William Wirt, the biographer of Patrick
Henry, a work which was criticised as a brilliant romance. In the
progress of the case Webster brought forward a highly respectable
witness, whose testimony (unless disproved or impeached) settled the
case, and annihilated Wirt's client. After getting through his
testimony, Webster informed his opponent, with a significant expression,
that he had now closed his evidence, and his witness was at Wirt's
service. The counsel for defence rose to cross-examine, but seemed for a
moment quite perplexed how to proceed, but quickly assuming a manner
expressive of his incredulity as to the facts elicited, and coolly
eyeing the witness, said: "Mr. ----, allow me to ask you whether you
have ever read a work called _Baron Munchausen_?" Before the witness had
time to answer, Webster rose and said, "I beg your pardon, Mr. Wirt, for
the interruption, but there was one question I forgot to ask my witness,
and if you will allow me that favour I promise not to interrupt you
again." Mr. Wirt in the blandest manner replied, "Yes, most certainly";
when Webster in the most deliberate and solemn manner, said, "Sir, have
you ever read Wirt's _Life of Patrick Henry_?" The effect was so
irresistible that even the judge could not control his rigid features.
Wirt himself joined in the momentary laugh, and turning to Webster said:
"Suppose we submit this case to jury without summing up"; which was
assented to, and Mr. Webster's client won the case.
* * * * *
In the year 1785 an Indian murdered a Mr. Evans at Pittsburg. When,
after a confinement of several months, his trial was to be brought on,
the chiefs of his nation were invited to be present at the proceedings
and see how the trial would be conducted, as well as to speak in behalf
of the accused, if they chose. These chiefs, however, instead of going
as wished for, sent to the civil officers of that place the following
laconic answer: "Brethren! you inform us that ----, who mu
|