New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-03-19

to, and he was in fact holding court out of London
Lord Middleton brought ND the subject, but said he
need not put the question, as it had been already
answered in the Commons and the Lord Chancellor,
like the Home Secretary said he had no jurisdiction
over Lord COeridge. The incident was, however,
made memorable by the declaration OF LORD Maihcs-
bury that the Game laws were made, not LOT inc
rich but for the preservation " OF wild animals ana
the amusement of the poor! ] give you but the
barest outline of these circumstances. 1t would De
useless to try to describe the angry commotioh
which Lord COleridge's observation, innocent anu
proper rs it may seem to you, has excited; useless
because you have no Game laws. and because soci-
ETY. in the United States has-supposng IL 10 nave
any at ala different Palladium and founda'ion
stone.
Since we are upon legal matters, it sworh noting
that an effort was made yesterday by Mr. Justice
Field in the Court of Queens Bench to put some
sort of limitation upon the we-knOwn rule OF the
English bar that barrister is bound to undertake
any case offered 10 him regardless Of what he may
think of H. There was an action for breach OF
promise and il came out in the course OF the trial
that the plaintiff q woman, had been the ms
tress of another man before her engagement to the
defendant. letter read which, to the inlhd Oh
the Judge, proved this cOnclusively. lie described
the letter indecent TO be read in pubic. Inc
iurv then sent IN n note to the bench to the effect
tbat in their opinion the case ought to proceed no fur
thor. But the plaintiffs counsel, Mr.. Glyn. seemed
inclined TO persist whereupon Dir. Justice fleid IN
quired of Mr. Glyn whether he had read that letter
"as a man. MIR. Glyn replied: I" am here as an
advocate, my lord and as to your observation ABOUT
n man. | think it is not one that should he ad-
dressed to at bar. If your lordship and the jury
have made up your minds, | will not proceed
Il 4 -, stft+y nc
and don't wish to be addressed as "A man."
This speech was followed by great laughter"
and by this curious observation from Mr.. Justice
Field: "Some persons have different feel
ings from lie. l cannot but feel indignant in
this ease, not as Judge but as man;
but some peoples feelings are different"
Upon the inry finding verdict for the defendant,
Mr.. Glyn rose once more to say that he was
"buefed" in the case and expressed his opinion on
it (mcaning against it, but that he was bound to
present It to the jury; that it was impossible Tor
him 70 take any other course" Then Mr.. Justice
Field: on. Glyn, there is point where the duty
of an advocate ends and that of man comes IN,
and in place Of raising a laugh at the letter,
thought you would have regretted having been the
means Of introducing filthy case to the jury"
This is distinctly a new departure, sh0uld the En-
glsh bar happen To acquiesce IN 1t. The contrary
doctrine has ftIIlSlep many man WIFI al cN''''O
for dong dirty work.. But is the Bench to decide
what cases lawyer may take and what he may not,
and to rcbuke him publicly if he makes mistaken
The public might be the gamers by such course,
bat how about the BARI They, says a commentator,
naturally look upon such proceeding as drpar-
ure from the wcllunderstoOd rules Of the game, ana
as establishing, moreover, a most dangerous pfece-
dent. IT, they argue, the manhood of the adYo-
cate NAV be appealed to, why not his sense OF JUS
ticep And where would hatend !" Willany Amer
lean lawyer say? The rule IN question does not
believe, exist in the United States. CIV