The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1882-04-08

One of our ablest as we'll as most consclen
tious local attorneys hands US the following
from the New York Truth, suggesting Its In.
sertion in the FREE TRADER, assuring US tina,
the remarks are quite as forcible in their ap
plication to this latitude as to New York:
AT intervals some one discovers that our bar
Is composed of very inefficient, not to say
knavish class of men. The basis of the charge
is almost invariably that selfish lawyers en-.
courage litigation for the fees and incompe.
tent lawyers because they are Ignorant. Re.
Gently judge spoke of 1t from the bench, and
q contemporary suggests that no doubt the
judge would have been glad to designate the
incOmpetents and knaves by name.
No doubt there are incompetent lawyers at
the bar, and scoundrels too; but the bar ought
not to be saddled with any greater RESPONSE
bility than belongs to it, The mass of unnec.
essary litigation is not wholly due to the neffi-
cheney or Ignorance OF lawyers, or to their
knavery. 1t is more to the inc0mpetency, in
consistency, and shall we not say knavery, Of
the bench. Our courts seem to have cast prin.
cipe to the dogs, and the rule :stare decssis, is
almost forgot item by them. If lawyer Is con.
suited about dispute he finds at the outset
that fundamental principles cannot be relied
upon, for the higher courts have overturned
them; and falling back upon ease law" he is
quite as much in a quandary as ever, for the
books bristle with decisions IN every direction.
He finds cases in favor of his client and cases
against hlm--cases explaining, distinguishing,
overrulng and resurrecting former adjudica-
tons, until his brain whirls.
And they are not the conflicting decisions OF
different courts only, but OF the same courts.
Some lawyers will recall two cases IN the Court
of Appeals. In one, a husband forged his
wlte's signature and drew her money from q
savings bank. She sued the bank, and the
Court of Appeals held that she could recover.
In the other wife forged her husbands sig.
nature and drew his money from q savings
bank. He sued the bank, and although the
rules were the same as those OF the other bank,
the Court of Appeals held that he could not
recover.
And in our General Term, in one case, Judge
A writing the opinion and Judges b and G
cOncurring, 1t was held that the General Term
could not review questions of fact found by a
referee under any other circumstances than
would justify them in reviewing facts found
by Jury; and in another case before the same
General Term, Judge writing the opinion
and Judges A and Z concurring, It was hetd
that the facts, as we'll a. the law, found by q
referee, were a proper subject Of review by the
General Term.
Now, when the decisions-and these are
only instances-are 80 confusing, is it just to
charge unnecessary litigation to the lncompe-
tency or knavery of lawyers? The fact is,
that the best lawyer IN New York and the
most honest, however conversant he may be
with the law of case, cannot predict what
the decision may be until he gets to the Court
Of Appeals, and when he gets there he Is very
ikaIv m laarp onmath,pn ahnut la thai n
good lawyer ever heard Of before
Are lawyers to be blamed, under these cir.
cumstances, for experimenting! Clients want
to litigate II there IS chance of winning, and
lawyers know that the chance of winning, In
most cases, Is just about equal TO that OF los
ing. If they are good guessers they can ad-
wise with the accuracy of an old faro player
and if they are poor guessers-well, it is
always best to guess as their client wishes, for
if they do not some one else will, and posi-.
bly, he may guess right TO their confusion.
When judges cease TO decide cases accord
ing to their prejudices and their personal, pc.
litical or social feelings, bending precedents
to meet the necessities OF the case before them
and when every judge in an appellate court
studies every case he decides, instead of care.
lessly reading the opinion of and thoughtess
ly concurring with one of his associates, we
may obtain body of law sufficiently consist
ent and certain to justify charge Of incompe
tency against the bar of pilng up litigation
But while 1t Is the practice of Judges todivids
the labor Of writing opinions IN advance OF
making their decisions, each reading the Opin
ions of his associates IN the streetcars without
verifying references or considering the authori
ties, the adjucations of our courts will contin
Tie to be at odds and evens and litigation viii
flourish.