The Sunday herald and weekly national intelligencer., 1891-02-15
QUICK-wITTED LAWYERS.
How They Have Saved Their Cases and
Clients by Clever Ruses.

How They Have Saved Their Cases and
Clients by Clever Ruses.
New York Sun.
There is room and need for quick wit in the
actual trial of cases in court 1t is one thing to
prepare a case with careful consideration OF the
facts and due application of the law to those
facts. 1t is quite another thing to be able to
handle case in open court under the spur of
competition with sharp opposing counsel or a
testy court. In every large law firm the work
is divided like that In factory, and to each is
assigned particular part of the case The one
who tries it must be man of rapid Judgment
and resources. lie must be able to meet sur
prises, to discern men, to divine hidden motives
to snap at the preiudices of jurors or Judges
and to seize the advantages of the moment
There is no end of need for quick wit in oues-
tions of identity In an extradtion case, which
depended entirely upon identity the defendant
had been fully identified. The defendants
counsel syly got his client to change his coat
in court with another man of similar appearance,
and within few minutes the witness was led
easily to identify the wrong man.
quick-witted and daring Western LAWYER
once saved guilty client from sure conviction
on charge of poisoning. 1t was proved that
the poisoning had been done by means of GER
tain cakes, portion of which was produced in
court. Wnen The counsel for the prisoner had
finished his speech he said:
"And these, gentlemen of the jury, are some
OF the alleged poisoned cakes. We declare to
you, gentlemen of the jury, that these are not
poisoned cakes. They are as harmless cakes as
ever were made, and in order, gentlemen of the
jury, to show you that these cakes are not poi
soned, will eat one Of them right here in your
presence"
And he did eat one. He took good care, how
ever, to leave the room at the earliest opportu-
nifty and to make bee line for an adjoining
room, where he had an emetic in readiness and
an antdote. But the jury never heard about
the emetlc or the antidote until the laWyer's
client had been acquitted
On another occasion witness had been de-
talilng with great minuteness certain conyersa-
lions which had occurred several years before
Again and again the witness testified to names
and dates and precise words, and it became nee
essary Tor his cross examiner to break him up
Inns was done by very simple device. While
the witness was glibly rattlng off his testimony
the cross-examiner handed him q law book. and
said
"Read aloud a paragraph from that book''
"Wbat for ?'' inquired the witness.
~ Will tell you after you have read it,'' said
the lawyer, and the witness accordingly read
aloud paragraph of most uninteresting matter
about lands, appurtenances, and hereditaments.
Then the lawyer went on and asked him few
more questions about his memory, and the wit
ness was positive that his memory was yery
good. Suddenly the lawyer said
''By the way, will you please repeat that par
agraph you just read about lands, appurtenances,
and hereditaments
"Why, of course could not do that replied
the witness
:, lou must have queer memory" retorted
Ine lawyer, "since you can repeat things that
you say occurred years ago, and you cannot re-
peat what you read moment ago."
Ihe witness was nonplussed, and the jury was
obviously amused at his discontinue.