The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1882-04-01
80 - -
Going to Law.

necessary tossoiety. Even fcourts are
accessory. But as the wholesome man
has small use for the doctor, hand the
honest man no need of "a sconfessor, SO
the just man will be q stranger to courts
and iuries, and will call lawyer to pre-
vent trouble. rather than to cure it,
2. The wit was not less wise than
bright who asked the plaintiff ending his
grievous tale of wrong with the declara-
ton that he should Immediately demand
damages in court-whether he had not
got damages enough already? For there
is just difference, enough in ordinary
eases between the damages a plaintiff
will get in court, and the damages. he has
already suffered 70 leave room fora play
on the words and no more AA4
3. Few litigants ever sit down to count
the cost in advance -eyent the money
cost. Let us be among the few prudent,
and reckon up the costs of an ordinary
case. suppose Browns cattle have bro
ken into Smith Is corn and destroyed corn
valued at, say 800. Smith demands a
settlement. Brown replies that the fence
was poor, that Jones's cattle got in af-
terward and did most of the damage,
and that the real damage was not half so
great as Smith claims Here are issues
for a frst-class suit. -. If Brown were
properly approached he would probably
pay $10-possibly $40 but Smith is sure
he has lost 800. and that Brown ought
to pay it all. He decides 70 enforce his
rights. The lawyer will begin suit for
$40. When it is ready for trial he wants
$15 more. eThep clerk'sfee-apd the Jury
fees are, say, SO more. Eheswitness fees
are 81. Smith loses0ii an fourteen DAYS
time, worth $2S. At. the, close of the
trial the lawyer wants $25 more. Total
disbursement $88. The estimated loss
was 800. To this add the costs of the
action, and the total damage is 1888.
Now, taking the average of cases of
this kind, Smith will be fortunate if he
RECEIVERS verdictof $25. In such case
his net loss will be 1868, or 1858 more
than it would have been if he had kept
out of court and let his srights" 90. If
he had compromised with Brown and
gotten $40 or $50, that would have been
clear gain; his victory in the court has
been a clear loss, and aamore disastrous
one than thesoriginal infiiction.a Somuch
for the plaintiffs side.
Now let us see about the defendant.
He might compromise with his neighbor
by paying say $50; but he will not. He
will fight the suit at whatever cost. His
lawyers fees alone are $50; he loses
time, worth at least 1925, and has 1926 to
pay at the end; the total is Just twice the
amount that the case might have been
settled for. The original DAMAGE was
said to be $100 The two f1enspe6d 81 80
in ''lawing" it, and of this only S25 goes
from one to the other; the other 1853 is
dead loss, which must be added to the
original $500 to show the real damaUe.
4, These figures are furnished us by
authority which cannot be questioned,
as very fair average figures. We are
assured that the relative actual results
of ordinary litigation will show a clear
loss quite as startling as this, and that a
very large percentage of cases show a
much larger loss, especially when new
trials, appeals and collateral suits are in
volved. This column is regularly read
in at least 100 families in rural neigh
bOrhood in this State, where litigation
that began about few sheep has gone
on until the court costs alone, three Years
ago, had amounted to over S400, and. so
far as we know, they are still rolling up.
5. But the most important considera-
tons are yet to be mentioned, and these
60 to the uncertainty of the result. If
the man who knew he had right to re-
cover could be even reasonably sure, his
case would be comparatively an easy
one. But nothing in this world of
uncertainties is more uncertain than the
result of lawsuit. Nor is this because
Judges and juries, and lawyers are worse
than other men. Consider the contin
gencies necessarily involved.
Q.) The statement of the case. Not
one man in a hundred knows how to
state his case to his own lawyer in its
full strength. He has strong conscious
ness that he ought to win, and he rests
chiefly on that. "a. a..-.- .....'
(2.) The presentation of the case by
the LAWYER to the court and jury Not one
lawyer in a hundred can state a case in
its full strength after it has been clearly
stated to him.
(3.) The evidence is always uncertain.
Old lawyers often remark that few thlnus
are so difficult as to extract the simple
truth from q witness who knows it; and
it must always be remembered that in
the nature of things witnesses seldom
know more than a fraction of what it is
desired to prove. And the risk of a ma
terial witness being sick, or dead, or on
a journey at the very moment he is need
ed, is also considerable; thousands of
cases are defeated by such missccarriages.
a. Allowances must always be made
for the Incompetence of judges and iur-
les. Verdicts fatty against evidence are
an everyday occurrence, and the gross
est ignorance of the law on the bench
is theperpetual disgust of the painstaken
Attorney f9s ID. sal or
(5.) Finally, perhaps the most treach-
erous feature of litigation is the uncer-
tainty Of the issue upon which the case
will at last be disposed of. The plaintiff
and the defendant assume, of course,
that the wholelstoryiwin come out. and
that the final Judgment will show who,
upon all the facts, had The most right on
his side. The experienced LAWYER
knows that such trial is the exception
and not the rule. A dozen or score OF
preliminary issues may arise, or may be
raised, between counsel prior to the trial;
questions about the forms of pleading and
methods of nroppdurel fahnIIf tba u,1oa;a