Little Falls transcript. [volume] (Little Falls, Morrison County, Minn.) 1876-1894, 1884-07-18
Sensible Lawyers and Sensible
3, Jurors. h Fl. s.ss a

/
RI 81, rs .3 ]. \. 81
Inc most eloquent y advocate Is not az
ways the most successful jury Lawyer.
The late Jerernia Jason, OF Boston, was
n.,t u. ~ tar, i oe,.1l
6. !. s.. Y. :, & q,
eo'e "i'n LII = = gu - petofe we
twelve men OF the Jury box. He never!
detained; his mind was too logical FOR
that. and he cared little for rhetoric.
nth z1.34o u, :. IL 4
:, - - 'ssA'Noo y 0ao ~. 90 = - s'1u -
they Were engaged, ID 9 friendly arbltra
ton, In which both were anxious, to, get
the facts Of the case. James Scarlett
no !. a. = d !, - ., j,
!, = 'e ''r.oi = 80 -, - = - - =
the art OF oratory. let ne won f f'
Yer diets 10 Brougha7na,s one = saoun-
tryman, who had served as aJt1ryman IN
several cases IN which the two great
lawyers were opposing 'l counsel, on pelng
ASKED es.i what he thoought o. then' SAID =
. That Lord brougham De wonder
1ul man. he can talk, ne can; put l.
don't tnlnk noWt OF Lawyer ocarlett.
indeed" relomed the questtoner.
I, I, Lou ECU surprise me why, you nave
been giving nun all ~ the vertucts.
ION, tneres hoWt III that' fepiled
51he 'simple-mlnaed eount,yhaan'f he
90 lucky, YOU see; ne De Always On tne
right slde!"
q; Scarlett won such eompiI ments ana
.verd1cts, TOO, which were better than
praise, by his habit OF eonverslng with
.the jury instead OF addressing them
collectively, as most lawyers DO, ne
would select one Of two, usually one,
ana reason With nm on the SUBJECT,
until the man apparently was convinced.
Ihe one whom he selected was not
always the foreman, put the Juror VINO
seemed the most mteiilgeng' ana ti1ese-
tore most likely TO nave influence With
MS coAeagues:
oomeS'mes ne Tould cnanee MS 1ac-
tics, anu select the lurynlan VINO seemed
the most stupid. once, when ne mad
MADE ma an u e long ADDRESS to'he
Jury, announcer lawyer VINO mao been
mpatlentiy waiting 70 get me ear OF
the court, 1oked him on his proll&
speech.
Did you see that fellow IN the fl1s.
tlan lacket" asked Scariett: Wen, /
saw that his head could hold but one
idea at time, and was determined to
get my ldeaanto 1tsand did"
The foiloWlnganecdotes illustrate the
good sense Wien w, Wnlc Y tnls great aoVo-
cate cond ElN z q ms cases 80,
In q % breach each t,f! promise case, seariet5
was counsel 1os the detenoant; VINO was
S11nTonSHCi tG nAVA been C21OlG0 INFO EnA
engagement ny the plalntlhs mother.
The mother was a witness, and com"
Pletely panied oc scar IN his efoss-ex-
ANIMATION OF her:
- 10 An ordinary advocate THIS failure
would have been fatal to his client. But
Scarlett turned it into success
You saw, gentleman OF the jury" ne
said, that l was but child III her
hands. What must my client have
been? .,
In an action for nuisance the plain
tlff,s chief witness was lady. she lived
near the alleged nuisance and swore
strongly IN favor the pla1nt!tf. Scar See
lett began his cross examination ny N
curing about her domestic retatlons,
her children hi and their Illnesses
30 sympathetlcany did ne. put nus
questions, that the lady became CONT
Dental and freely talked about her
family affairs 'Ihe Judge, thlnk11lg
these matters irrelevant, 1nterfered but
Scarlett begged to be allowed to pro-
ceed. On the conclusion OF the cross !
examination, he sald,- a
my lord, I call no Witnesses. This li'
lady has sworn that she mas brought up
The ;nr ~ ap,',sad ~ we'll 81 convinced
gave a verdict Tor Scar1ett's client.