The Manitowoc pilot. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1859-1932, 1878-05-02
FUaIN TIE WITTSESS-BOX.
In recent trial at Winchester, wit

III recent trial at winchester, q VII
ness, failing to make his version of q
conversation Ineligible by reason OF his
fondness for ''says T. and ''says he, .
was taken in hand by Baron Martin with
the following result:
"My man, tell us now exactly what
passed eyes, my lord. said would
not have the pig "And what was his
answer" ''He said he had been keep
ing it for me, and that he" ''No,
no; he could not have said that; he spoke
in the first person. "No my lord,
was the first person that spoke ]
mean don't bring in the third person
repeat his exact words" '.There was
no third person, my lord; only him and
HE" "My good fellow, he did not say
he had been keeping the pig; he said, 4
have been keeping it. y II assure you,
my lord, there was no mention of your
| iordship. We are on different stories.
| There was no third person there, and if
anything have been said about your lord,
ship I Must have heard it, The Baron
gave in. Lord Mansfield once came off
second best in endeavoring to make a
witness use Ineligible language. The
man had deposed that he hadnot suffered
| loss at the defendants hands, because he
was up to him. ''What do you mean by
being up to him?" inquired his lordship.
"Mean, my loru? why, that I was down
upon him." ''Down upon him?" re-
peated the judge, interrogatively. eyes,
my lord; deep as he thought himself, [
staggered him." ''Really," said Lord
Mansfield, II do not understand this
sort Of language" mot understand itl"
exclaimed the unabashed adept in slang.
''Not understand it, lord, what flat you
must bel" Humorous in this way Of
putting things was the gentleman who
said stock exchange bear was a person
who sold what he had not got; bull q
man who bought what he could not pay
for, and that''a financier" was''a man who
one who has none to SELL" A Jew, speak
ing of a young man as his soni in-law,
was accused of misleading the court,
since the young man was really his son.
Moses, however, persisted that the name
he put to the relationship was the right
| one; and, addressing the bench, said:
Il was in Amsterdam two years and
hree-quarters; when | come home finds
this lad. Now the law obiges me to
maintain him. and consequently he is my
n---,'-=.,.rr- -r----.3-ar--,---
field, "this is the best definition of SON
in law ! ever yet heard" It may be
| doubted if that legal luminary would
have acquiesced as readily as witness,
whose name was not to be found on the
law. List, calling himself a solicitor,
Oh the ground that he had been soliciting
advertisements for newspaper for the
last eight years; or held bill poster,
who could not read, justified in describ-
ing himself as professional man con-
would not agree with the street-bigger
who admitted his calling was low one,
but still thought it SO much better than
that followed by his father that he felt
inclined to be proud of it. "And pray,
sir" inquired the learned gentleman
! cross-examining him, "what was your
fathers calling?" "Well," demurely re-
piled the sham darkey, che was a law
yer" An Irishman examined before a
avow anything, that one of the commits
sioners asked if there We're any whales
on the west coast2 ''Is it whales?" said
Pat. ''Sure, you may seem by the
dozen, spoutihg about like waterengines
all over the place" "Are there many
dog fish," Dogs, begorra! yed say so
had ye passed the night there. Sure,
we can't sleep for the barkin' o. thim"
"Do hyingfsh abound there?" queried
another gentleman. "Flying- fish, is it?"
quoth the veracious fellow. "If we didn't
put up the shutters every night there
woldn't be whole pane o glass III the
house, for the craters batin aginst them!"
When he came up for his expenses, Pat
tried to coax something extra out of the
commissioners on the plea that he had
sworn to everything their honors "axed'
him. Irish witness are not usually so
tractable, no small amount of skill and
patience being required to extract def
mite answer to the simplest of questions
Nothing pleases your funloving Irishman
better than to bother a lawyer, and the
Irish court have known many dialogue
like this: "You are a Roman Catholic"
cam T." care you not?" You say l
am." "Come, sir; what's your religion?"
"The true religion" "What religions
that?" "My religion "And what is
your religionl" "My mothers religion?"
"What was your mothers religion2"
"She tux whiskey in her tay." you
bless yourself don't you?" "When I'm
done with you, l will" What place of
worship do you go TOP" ''The most con-
vayneint. "Of what persuasion are
you:" "My persuasion is what you won't
find out. D" "What is your belief" "That
you are puzzled" do you confess?"
"Not to YOU "Who would you write
to if you were likely to die:" 1.-The doc
tor. > II insist upon you answering me,
sir. Are you Roman Catholic" II
am" "And why didn't you say so at
once?" "You nevur axed me- You said I
was great many things, but you never
axed me; you were drivin' cross words
and crooked questions at me, and I
/. thought it was manners to cut my be-
havior on you own pasthern."