The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-08-26
THE HISTORY OF THE FRENCH BAR.

Gently published in Edinburgh, enIlJleu An
uistorical sketch of the French Bar, from its
ORIGIN TO the Present Day. by Archibald
Young
.Pbilip the Bold ''imposed upon advocates
the obligation of swearing that they would
only take charge of those causes which they
believed to be just, the refusal to take the
oath being punished with interdiction." There
were however, occasions on which the prac-
tising barrister could not comply literally
with the injunctions of politeness and com
PLEASANT suavity, but was required to give his
clients opponent the lie in very offensive
though conventional language For instance
in applying for permission to test the Justice
of claim by Judicial combat, counsel were
obliged to give and take the lie direct; but
in discharging this function of vituperative
allegation advocates were careful to say that,
in thus speaking words of high disdain and
insult, they were only speaking officially and
from no sentiment of personal disesteem for
the honorable gentlemen whom it was their
painful duty to accuse of falsehood and theft
Having concluded his address to the bench
the advocate who applied for a judicial order
authorizing a trial by combat, threw his
clients glove into court, thereby making the
wager of battle Whereupon the counsel for
the defense, if he objected to so rude and
insecure a way of deciding question of fact
application, and added Tn case the
Court should think that the statement made
by the opposite party is sufficient to sup
port the wager of battle, my client denies
the facts set forth; on the contrary he affirms
that he who has caused these allegations to be
made lies, and is ready to support this by
himself or by his champion, and thereto
pledges his gage. Whereupon giving his
gage, the defendant in his own person, ad-
a. ~ H.
other strain If the Court authorized the
combat, the plaintiff and defendant were left
to settle their differences in the lists by fight
ing to the death, or till one of them cried
craven. But it was held that if, through in
advertence or excessive zeal, the counsel of
either party made or appeared to make, his
clients cause personal affair. by putting the
offensive parts of his address in the form of
direct and personal affirmation instead of
official statement, it was held that the
principal against whom he appeared might
make him a party to the quarrel, and even
elect to fight him instead of crossing lances
or breaking cudgels with his employer. can
tome Loisel, in his Dialogue des Avocats, -
says the author, ''malles mention of an advo-
cate named Eabrefort, who was on the point
of being compelled to enter the lists in per-
son, because, whilst stating the case for Ar
mand de Montaigne, one of the parties in
judicial combat, he affirmed that he was
ready to make good his averments with his
body in the field, without taking care to
make it clear that he said this for his client,
and not for himself. Those present on the
occasion thought this a capital joke, and the
unlucky Fabrefort was much laughed at for
his mistake 4 X
Amongst Mr.. Young's stories illustrative of
the domestic interests and private relations
of the French lawyers of past time is a droll
anecdote of Bude, the judicial scholar and
writer of the sixteenth century, who was so
absorbed in the studies and practice of his
profession that, on being informed that fire
was consuming his house, he replied to the
messenger who had brought him news of the
mishap, Tell my wife; L don't meddle with
domestic affairs. More fortunate than
Bude, whom he resembled in devotion to
his profession and disregard for all other
cares, Henrion had no wife to disturb him
with announcements that his kitchen
chimney had taken fire. When the first Ma
pOleon asked Henrion why he had never mar
ried, the advocate replied, ''Upon my word
sire | never had time But the story of the
French bar is bright with incidents which
show that devotion to legal study neither
deadens the affections nor leaves lawyers
without time for the softer sympathies; and
of the anecdotes which exhibit the fine hui
grander and more pathetic than the record of
Aired de Loiscrols death during the Reign of
Terror. Together with his son, AIRED de
Loiscrol had been thrown into prison.
where they occupied the same chamber
on the night preceding the day appointed for
the younger captive's execution. Disturbed
by anticipatious of final separation from his
child, the elder Loiscrol passed the night in
sleeplessness whilst the son slumbered tran
'ba ,,,ppr,ipc t1,o
Loiscrol was still unconscious, when the
authorities summoned him to endure the ap
pointed death, and seizing the opportunity
for sublime exhibition of parental devoted
ness, the father answered the summons wa,
accepted by the officers, and ''perished,
victim to his paternal affection, the nigh
before the fall of RObespierre.'
The fees of the French bar in olden tim,
were moderate, but they seem to have gene
rally exceeded the payments made to tn,
counsel of feudal England. Philip the BolC
ordained that no advocate should receive
larger fee than thirty H0reS IurHOiS, sun
equivalent to about G27 of ourmOney ''Ad
Vocates were to swear that they would receiv
nothing above that sum, directly or in
directly and they were liable to be declare,
infamous, and to be perpetually interdicte,
for any violation of this oath. How lon,
this legislative interference with the natura
remunerations Of labor deprived advocate
of part of their due rewards is uncertain bu
that the restriction came to be disregarded i
the course of six generations, we may infe
from the regulations made by Charles tn
Seventh for the government of the Ban
which, making no mention of amaximum fee
merely enjoin advocates ''to be moderate il
their fees, both fot pleadings and writings
which seems to show that the old regulation
restricting them to thirty kOre8 Iu'Rois ha