heard, the counsel for the defendant rose and said " Mister Judge, we defend this action upon three counts, all of which we shall most satisfactorily prove to you.

"In the first place, we will prove, by undoubted evidence, that the kettle was cracked when we borrowed it;

"In the second, that the kettle, when we returned it, was whole and sound;

"And in the third, we will prove that wę never borrowed the kettle at all."

There is such a thing as proving too much, but one thing is pretty fairly proved in this case, which is, that the defendant's counsel must have originally descended from the Milesian stock.

I have heard many amusing stories of the peculiar eloquence of the lawyers in the newly settled Western States, where metaphor is so abundant. One lawyer was so extremely metaphorical upon an occasion, when the stealing of a pig was the case in point, that at last he got

to

corruscating rays." The judge (who appeared equally metaphorical himself) thought proper to pull him up by saying-"Mr.—, I wish you would take the feathers from the wings of your imagination, and put them into the tail of your judgment."

Extract from an American paper:

"Scene.-A Court-house not fifty miles from the city of Louisville-Judge presiding with great dignity-A noise is heard before the door -He looks up, fired with indignation.- Mr. Sheriff, sir, bring them men in here; this is the temple of liberty-this is the sanctuary of justice, and it shall not be profaned by the cracking of nuts and the eating of gingerbread.” ”—Marblehead Register.

I have already observed that there is a great error in the office of the inferior and district judges being elective, but there are others equally serious. In the first place the judges are not sufficiently paid. Captain Hamilton remarks— "The low salaries of the judges constitute

matter of general complaint among the members of the bar, both at Philadelphia and New York. These are so inadequate, when compared with the income of a well-employed barrister, that the State is deprived of the advantage of having the highest legal talent on the bench. Men from the lower walks of the profession, therefore, are generally promoted to the office; and for the sake of a wretched saving of a few thousand dollars, the public are content to submit their lives and properties to the decision of men of inferior intelligence and learning.

"In one respect, I am told, the very excess of democracy defeats itself. In some States the judges are so inordinately under-paid, that no lawyer who does not possess a considerable private fortune can afford to accept the office. From this circumstance, something of aristocratic distinction has become connected with it, and a seat on the bench is now more greedily coveted than it would be were the salary more commensurate with the duties of the situation."

The next error is, that political questions are permitted to interfere with the ends of justice. It is a well-known fact that, not long ago, an Irishman, who had murdered his wife, was brought to trial upon the eve of an election; and, although his guilt was undoubted, he was acquitted, because the Irish party, which were so influential as to be able to turn the election, had declared that, if their countryman was convicted, they would vote on the other side.

But worst of all is the difficulty of finding an honest jury—a fact generally acknowledged. Politics, private animosities, bribery, all have their influence to defeat the ends of justice, and it argues strongly against the moral standard of

a nation that such should be the case; but that it is so is undoubted.* The truth is that the juries have no respect for the judges, however respectable they may be, and as many of them.

* Miss Martineau, speaking of the jealousy between the Americans and the French creoles, says" No American expects to get a verdict, on any evidence, from a jury of French creoles."

really are. The feeling" I'm as good as he❞ operates every where. There is no shutting up a jury and starving them out as with us; no citizen, "free and enlightened, aged twenty-one, white," would submit to such an invasion of his rights. Captain Hamilton observes

"It was not without astonishment, I confess, that I remarked that three-fourths of the jurymen were engaged in eating bread and cheese, and that the foreman actually announced the verdict with his mouth full, ejecting the disjointed syllables during the intervals of mastication! In truth, an American seems to look on a judge exactly as he does on a carpenter or coppersmith; and it never occurs to him, that an administrator of justice is entitled to greater respect than a constructor of brass knockers, or the sheather of a ship's bottom. The judge and the brazier are paid equally for their work; and Jonathan firmly believes that, while he has money in his pocket, there is no risk of his suffering from the want either of law or warming pans."