The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1891-03-19
COUNTY NEWS.
BRISTOL. WIS. March Il. 1891.
Law and Lawyers.

tive seems to have the preponderance OF |
evidence and argument at present. The |
laws Of Wisconsin are probably fair |
sample Of the laws in many other states; |
but it strikes the writer that they are very |
antiquated and belong to some ancient |
feudal age when the government possessed |
all the rights and the people none. An
intelligent and free people ought to pos
sess sufficient genius to devise and enact
laws suited to their present wants and not
copy antique systems. The laws in them
selves are not SO bad as the code of prac-
tice under which they are executed, or
rather defeated The code seems espec
tally designed to favor rogues and to de-
feat justice and legally rob the people. |
The laws were enacted by lawyers for
their particular use and benefit and it is
wonder they were not published in Greek |
or Latin SO as to conceal their import
from the people and render 1t necessary to |
employ Interpreters to-disclose the secrets
Of law. That is virtually what the law
amounts to at present, d dead letter TO the
people. 4 Justice court was designed to
adjust minor matters Of difference among
mankind: their jurisdiction is limited, and
in fact they have no jurisdiction at all in
any case except by the Will and consent
of the lawyers They are simply stool
pigeons or decoy ducks to bring the game
within the range Of the lawyers. II the
lawyers consent to trial before Il justice, 1t
is because they believe they can dictate
his judgment, and in majority OF cases
they succeed in doing so: and the justice
simply registers the will Of the lawyers
and not his own judgment. Should d
Justice assert himself and render his own
Judgment contrary TO the will OF the at
tOrneys, they will denounce him for a
numskull and nincOmpoop and lmmedl-
Ately give notice Of appeal. When an at
tOrney has tough client and tough case
he y i'll invariably demand . tough jury
to adiudicate the same in order TO defeat
Justice 1t is a patent fact TO the public
that lawyers are sOulless corporations,
m n Of mercen8ry motives whose moral
obliQuity is most dense and dark, who
have no sense of justice or honor, who go
in to win, right or wrong, and pocket the
proceeds. Should a country client seek
justice IN a city court the case Will be
continued from time to time and Gay 70
day until the clients are picked to their
pin-feathers Is it any wonder that the
public regard the law with suspicion and
the lawyers with well merited contempt
BY way Of illustration the writer will cite
a recent case in the town of Bristol as evil
dence Of the foregoing facts. A certain
christian citizen with his family entered
this town about the 10Th day of Novem
Der. 1889, and rented farm from the
great Foghorn of Democracy for a term OF
three years, agreeing to cultivate the same
and take one-half the proceeds thereof for
his pay. A contract to that effect was
written and subscribed by the parties,
and the farm, stock and utensils were
placed at the tenants disposal, He pro-
ceeded to execute his part of the contract
in good faith and did well considering the
unprOpitiOus season. But the lessee as
sumed the right to sell the proceeds, and
did sell the same and pocket the money,
and refused to divide with the tenant. At
the termination OF the first year the poor
tenant had received only $50 pounds OF
fresh pork and 0ne-half the milk of seven
COWS, while the landlord'was owing him
the sum Of &19S which he utterly refused
to pay The tenant offered TO submit the
matter Of difference to arbitrator for set
Element, but the landlord declined. The
tenant then sought counsel, but was not
able to find an attorney in the city willing
to take his case, he being too poor for
their purpose. The tenant finally found
a friend willing to assist him. The case
was brought sefore the veteran court Of
Brighton. who signified his willingness to
give the case a hearing. On return day
the parties appeared The plaintiff filed
his com plant for 1898. The defendant
fled counter claim for the sum OF $685.
The plaintiff demurred to the answer for
the reason that the defendant claimed a
sum in excess Of the jurisdiction Of the
court. The demurrer was sustained and |
IL i = tn lA
limit of the law Parties Joined issue and |
adjourned one week. On Feb. 9th, the |
day Of trial the parties appeared; the
defendant by his attorney, the great legal
luminary and public prosecutor Of Keno
sha County, who came with coach and |
driver and the major part OF his legal IL |
brary, consisting Of some old second hand |
Wisconsin reports, good enough law IN
the country, but not worth d in the
city. Before entering the office the legal |
luminary declared that he would nOn-sult |
the case in five minutes; but when he saw |
the honest face Of the court he demanded |
a Jury Immediately. A jury was granted |
and in due time summoned and impan- |
eled. Meanwhile the great eXpounder of |
Blackstone and Kent read forty-one chap
tiers of the said reports on copartnerships |
and contracts. The plaintiff proceeded to
give testimony, when suddenly the banty |
barister bounded from his perch and |
struck as many attitudes as a jumping |
Jack, shook his official horns at the court |
and beloved ominously and declared that |
the entire proceeding was illegal, nulla and
void, and moved to quash the same. The
court inquired, upon what ground The
bantam replied and said: Upon the
ground that the parties are copartners in
business and cannot sue each other while
the copartnership lasts. The court held
that landlord and tenant were not copart
ners in law, not in fact, and denied the
motion. The bantam then moved to
quash on the ground that the action was
brought on breach of contract, which
could only be maintained in a court of
equity. The court reminded him that
the action was not brought on a breach OF
contract but on balance Of account due
and denied the motion. The prosecution
then proceeded to a close, when the ban
foT fip1xr of no with /