St. Landry democrat. (Opelousas, La.) 1878-1894, 1885-09-05

party IN question testified that ne had
been to New York Just before that time,
but had returned, and was in Boston on
that Monday. Mr.. Sweetser, who was
counsel on the other side, cross-examined
this man. when did you return from
New York previous to that Monday?"
he asked. Goa the Sunday before
that day." show did you get
to Boston from New York at that
time-boat or by RALPH II came by
on by rail. - Mr.. Sweetser did not ask
any more questions, but showed that, as
no trains were run between the two
cities on Sundays at the time sworn to,
the man could not have come to Boston
from New York by rail, and that, there
fore, he had testified falsely. That, of
course, ended the case. The most ac-
complished cross-examiners in the past
as well as the present were of smooth
speech, kindly voice and insinuating adj
dress. Rufus Choate made his greatest
successes at the bar when associated
with the late Henry F. Durant, who not
only looked after his witnesses and the
jury, but conducted cross-examinatlons
of opposing witnesses. Mr.. Durant was
noted for the successful way in which he
could slide into the confidence of wit
Bion Bradbury, of Maine, was another
example of this class of cross-examlners.
An Irish witness was once crOss-eXam-
ined by him so effectively that he was
induced to tell all he knew, to the detri-
ment of the case in behalf of which he
was called upon to testify. After lea7-
ing the stand the witness was upbraided
by counsel for giving the case away
so completely. He replied: can
sure, how could I help it? Could any
one have the heart to refuse to answer
| any question that so fine ard
SO polite gintleman as Misther Brad
bury would be afther asking him?"
Sometimes cross-examination, itper-
sisted in without judgment, may be made
to iniure the cause it is designed to aid.
In case of alleged false signature, tried
| in 8 Boston court several years ago, a
| number of so-called experts in hand
writing testified that a genuine signature
was not what it purported to be, while,
on the other side, gentleman who had
had large experience in banking and
other business affairs was brought in to
testify that it was a genuine signature.
| In the course of crOss-examination, this
witness stated that he could at one time
tell forged from a genuine signature
| with which he was familiar the moment
he saw it. He was asked if he could
not still do it. He replied that, as he
was growing old, he feared his powers
would not enable him to do it success
fully. Being pressed by his cross-ex-
aminer to give an exhibition of his skill,
with the evident intent of showing
| that he was Boosting of what
he could not accomplish, he finally
consented to a trial, and came
out of it with flying colors, never
making mistake in detecting the
counterfeit from the genuine signature
in many trials. Sometimes a witness is
so hard to manage that the Judge, to re-
lieve the examining counsel, takes him
in hand. But counsel are sometimes
extremely sensitive in regard to judicial
| interference with an examination. A
case was once tried before Judge Storey
| in which the late jeremiah Mason was
counsel for the defense. The Judge,
probably TO expedite matters, asked a
question of the witness. Mr.. Mason
was at once upon his feet. IF, " said
he. ssyour honor asks that question IN
| behalf of the prosecution, we object; If
for the defense, we do not want it. The
late Judge Shepley, of Maine, was at
one time trying a case where an Indian
witness was claimed by the opposing
counsel, to be incompetent because OF
his unbelief in a future existence. After
the opposing counsel, who was cross
examining him, had tried for some time
| in vain to obtain from the Indian some
thing that would bear out his claim,
| the Judge said: ..Let me try him sir;
may be able to get an intelligent an
swer fron, him. To the Indian he
said: paul, when you die, do
you think you will live AGAIN.
s'Go long, Judge Shepley. You know
as well as Indian that when Paul dies,
him dead. How can he live again?'
AS aresult of this common-sense answer,
Paul was declared an incompetent wit
ness. Among the witnesses that it will
not do to cross examine with severity is
the female witness. If a rigorous poll
/ cy is necessary, itmust be skillfully con,
cealed beneath the suaVe, gentle and
even respectful demeanor on the part Of
the attorney. Expert witnesses-espe'
cially in the matter of handwriting-are
not looked upon with favor by the lega
profession, though they are employed
when it is found that their services may
be useful in case; but lawyers gener
allv dislike the work of cross-eXamin
ing them. The handwriting experts are
in the opinion of the profession, gener
ally great humbugs, and sometimes ge
nicely caught, A story is, told of a lead
ing lawyer who, some years ago, had t.
cross-examine an expert in handwriting