The Iola register., 1891-07-17
JUDGE rAnK1ssos.s LETTER.
The Good witness and His AYpesrane In
an English Court.
LONDON, June g, 1891.

Possession - nine pOintS N law.
but geod witness is often ten points In
a lawsuit. Alas, how difficult 1t ia TO
arrive at the exact truth IN q disputed
controversy. and often, indeed, whether
there be conflict in the evidence or
not How different the impression
conveyed OF the same transaction, OBJ
served from practically the same
standpoint and related by different
sons who saw or heard accurately and
distinctly and with the ability, to fairly
express in words what they saw and
heard, are like angels visits, few and
far between. Except for this melan-
choly fact, the guesses Of the court
and jury would often be nearer the
bulls eye OF justice. Comparisons are
lot always pleasant but even IN the
matter of stupid witnesses our coultry-
men OF the wild and woody west COM
pare favorably with their coekney
cousins across the sea. / venture this
opinion after considerable observation
about the royal courts OF justice and
after hearing good part OF the
famous baccafat scandal case, in which
the prince OF Wales cut 30 unenviable
a figure, disgreceful certainly as man
and citizen, but perhaps not 30 much
so as a prince The English don't like
to be disappointed and fooled, and
hence don't look for much from their
kings and princes. II an exception
occurs in kind, motherly woman who
wields the scepter for time, they bear
it with fair measure OF cofnplacency,
knowing that 1t cannot always last.
But this has nothing to do with the
witness business with which | began
though have twice seen the prince of
Wales and heir apparent In the witness
box, once in the celebrated Mordant
divorce case some twenty years ago,
and again as the keeper of
the bank" and owner of the gambling
paraphernalia in a game for money
which had been forbidden By the head
Of the house whose guest he was. The
prince. by the way, makes pretty good
witness, though not very skillful gam
bier. considering his great amount OF
practice.
But the ideal witness appeared in a
case closed Yesterday, wherein an un-
lucky namesake of mine, Or l OF him.
was the defendant Whether because
Mr.. Bull is more practical and less i'm
aginative than our Uncle Sam, or from
whatever cause, he has blunt way OF
getting at the facts in q case, upon
which | think we have made no i'm
lprovement. 1t is more the custom here,
for instance, that the Judges shall be
really judges-Seeiug with their own
ears and hearing with their own ears.
| An American lady was sued by her
uressmaker for an unpaid bill. The de-
fense was mo fit" Who shall decide
as to the fit? For upon that point hangs
the real issue In the case. Think OF
what cumbersome and exasperating
case for Kansas court, with the multi
tudinous array Of experts and conflict
| ing opinions as to fashion and taste.
Here the unskillful modiste was direct
ed to bring the garments enumerated in
the unpaid bill into court, whittier our
recalcitrant countrywoman stood upon
her dignity and her rights. In the
courts private room the defendant was
directed to put on the alleged ill-fitting
garments. Reappearing in this truly
English garb, the matter IN dispute was
brought ''at one fell swoop" within
range of the courts vision and learned
observation. Adjusting its glasses on
its digni6ed and impartial nose. the
court in this case decides that the fair
American malcontent was partly in the
right. and proceeded to adjust the fair
and proper allowance that should be
entered as a credit in the unliquidated
bill for the fault in the ruffle, the
| draw in the waist" and lily fitting
| "gores in the bust" Where the articles
| impugned are of a more retiring and
sacred nature, cannot say what plain
course the court might mark out for
itself. | only refer to cases that have
occurred since my brief stay in England.
! so far as l can learn, however, the
deeper mysteries of the feminine toilet
have not greatly embarrassed the learn
ing and dignity of the English Bench
1t might be observed. too, as an argu-
ment in favor Of this system, that it
would have tendency to exclude from
the bench in our country bachelors, as
we'll az young, untidy, ard unappreci-
ative married men.
And whoever saw real wound up
music box on the witness stand. testify
Kansas? Yet one Of these melOdious
articles lately appeared in an English
court with the result of triumphantly
obtaining Judgment for itself and ven
dor. There were several pleas put for
ward against the payment of eighteen
pounds charged for the article under
imputation. The defendant was a
boarding house keeper and probably re-
fecting upon the close relationship be-
tween the ear and the stomach pur-
chased a music box plainly purporting
upon card affixed TO its lid, TO play.
among other tunes, la Gitana." The
plaintiff music box dealer came sduarely
to the mark of fair dealing and per-
feet rectitude in his calling, in his re-
plication to to the defendants imputa-
tious upon the time or waltz-which
his box upon the lid plainly promised
to play. He did not shuttle about in
legal whereases and technical ambigui- |
ties to the effect that the pieces per-
formed were as good or better than the |
printed program on the bOx's upturned |
face. He plead justification pure and
simple. Bring the box" said the |
court, anxious TO get directly at the
bottom of the CASE as an
Ottawa legal friend Of mine
would say, No time was lost /.
in proving the identity of the box or
what it promised to do when properly
set agoing. His honor, Judge Martin
dan directed that the box. this far
from dumb witness-should be wound
up. Who has not seen the wound up
witness and heard them spatter and /
sputter until fully run down or turned
of By an exasperated court: II is a rule
of evidence, l believe, that the best
and most positive evidence must be
rather than the poorer and
more uncertain What better evidence
Of what the box could and would do
a. ollnrr - ~ r,lav ia nur tuna in