New-York tribune., 1894-04-22
hours for the sake OF hclt an hour OF Miss May
Yohe.

Yohe.
Lord Esher. Master OF the Rolls, is one Of the
few Judges who relieve the aridity OF judictsi
,roceedinys h,, huror or by the language OF the
world as distinguished from that OF the courts
This "a nerhaps due to the fact that he Is man
of tho world as well as one OF the best judges on
the Bench. He has Just had before him one OK
the "Charleys Aunt" cases.-a much fho'"
curious study OF human nature thah Is u o'
found in the play itself. or In most other pays
Of the period. The plaintiff is an actress MISE
Emily Sheridan, who introduced the delehua"'
Mr. Hartmont. a financial agent 10 MI e"-
lev then wanting money to bring out C"a'.e
Aunt" Mr. Penley and Mr.. Hartmoht seem o'''
10 have agreed to pa Miss Sheridan ior her
services. In both cases she had TO orihs Oh
oo,,or 20 enforce the agreement, and in ootn
cases she has been successful.
.,oins, tho latter verdict Mr.. Hartmont ap-
,o.led and the appeal came before the Master OF
the Rolls and Lords Justices A. H. smith an"
Davev-a strong team. The appear was us
missed Lord Esher may be said TO have iausneo
the appellant cut Of court he sa'o " "''
counsel: .,,, rh.
lady will put on rev bonnet anu ~ ~.
,n,o Tho witness-tcx, and you Will nave 'h'
same verdict
Than followed this colloquy:
Mr. Finlay--We may. perhaps get 'e''
ceptible jIry. O.aughter).
The Master Of the Rolls-Were the jury Pc
o,1,or,v susceptible? 0.aughteD. Have you got
,...,. raraI. because II we look at it we may
he able to Judge how far they were iNe,'
-, 10 moro than ordinarily susceptible. Naugn-
teri. . -
the jurymen? daughter.
Mr. Finley-I have not got the panel NY
Lord. ..,.
The Master Of the Rolls-Can you say tha'
.h,s e a verdict that no twelve men intending
70 act honestly and fairly could give!
Mr. Finlav submit d that in any case ths
,,ordic, was against the weight OF evidence
The court seems to have taken judicial Kno"i-
edge that the plaintiff Is young and gooo-ooHihe'
or "verv likely good-looking." as Lord Hsher
cautiously put II. One rather WONDERS ""''''.
he had seen the play. 1t Is one OF '"e "'s
vulgar Of modern farces. and one OF 'he uu'e'
and beyond dispute the most successi"' "''N
nroAtable Mr. Penley and Mr.. Har'moht a'7
said 10 have divided $1,000 week between .he'i'
for more than a year; Yet they grudge poor MISS
char,dan oer commission. and her verdict o. l
think. some $500 in this last case.
The decision OF the court IS thought 10 nave
considerable legal significance. Defenoahts "e''
40 Won see to upset the verdict as against ''e
weipht OF evidence. The court SAID there was
too much granting OF new trials on tha' grouhu'
Judges often granted new trial where the eVi-
aarca was such that they themselves wouid
have given a different verdict. That is not 'ho
,ru, rule said Lord Esher. The rule Is that there
should be no new trial unless 1t could De SNOW"
conclusively that the verdict was such as no
twelve men acting honestly and fairy cou'o
give" The responsibility OF finding Veru'c'
belongs 10 the jury. That is what jury Is lor'
and Judges are not to relieve them OF H. Ihs
Bench IS sometimes thought eager to enlarge l's
authority or to encroach on the province OF 'he
fury Here Is. at any cate. one most eminent
Judge who takes the opposite line IT, W. D