The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1897-04-24

from making Amerca his future home.
After q short residence in Holland, EN-
met and his family sailed for New York,
where he was received with q brilliant
ovation, in which he was welcomed to
his adopted country by Dewitt Clinton,
in an address Of SURPRISING eloquence
and effect,
In due time he took his place at the
bar Of the state of New York, and as;
cended to the highest degree of profess
sional excellence. ~
Though an exile from his native land,
he. always continued to correspond with
his friends in Ireland. Among these, as
we have said, was Curran, whom he
often termed the Demosthenes of Ire
land. On one occasion, when asked at
reception given by Clinton to bril-
liant assemblage Of literateurs, to des-
cribe Curran, he said: II can do, so In
no better manner than by repeating
what Bryon said of him: The power
of Curran's eloquence, wit and lmagina-
ton was exhaustless. saw him pre-
scented to Madame de Stael, at Mackin>
tosh's It was the confidence between the
Rhone and the Rhine, and they were
both so id homely that could not help
wondering how the best .intellects of
France and Ireland could have<taken up,
respectively, such Unlocking residences
"But," continued Emmett, "Curran was
not homely. He was short Of stature,
graceful in form, with a swarthy COM
plexion and eyes that glowed like live
Goals. His countenance@ was singularly
expressive. When he stood before a
jury he not only read their own hearts,
but gave them back his own" 40.
Emmett was often associated with or
opposed to Webster, Writ, Luther Martin
and other great lawyers of his time. In
the celebrated case of Gbbon vs.. o.
den, involving considerations of the
most important character, he was OPP
posed to Webster and Writ His asso-
ciate was Thomas J. Oakley. In a
charming letter to Judge Carr, Writ
speaks of Emmett and Oakley as fol-
lows: Tomorrow begin my tolls in
the supreme court, and the great steam
boat question from New York will he
taken up. Emmett and Oakley on one
side, Webster and myself on the other.
Emmet's whole soul is In the case,
and he will stretch all his astonishing
powers Oakley is said to be one of the
first 1ogicians Of the age, as. much a
Phocion as Emmett .ts a Themistocles,
and Webster is as ambitious as Caesar.
As for me, am-but will leave all de-
scription of myself to you. Emmet's
arguments always command attention
and admiration. But he will, one-half
| Of the time, address the judges as my
lords, instead of your honors, suppose
from the force of early habit.
Opposed to Emmett in the case of the
Mercedes was William Pinkney, of Mary
land, famous in American history, not
only as great lawyer, but eminent as
statesman and diplomat. He succeeded
Rufus King as Minister to England, and
while there he was imbued by the min
istry with strong dislike of Emmett,
which, as we shall see, exhibited itself
during the argument we are considering
in matter that created scene never
before or since equaled in an American
tribunal. Although Pinkney was I'M
equaled as an erudite, logical reasoner,
his arguments in congress and at the
bar owed much to his admirable deliv-
cry. They were intrinsic. exhibiting the
abundant resources of learned, ener-
getic mind, clear discernment. correct
standing. Among Pinkney's faults was
his excessive vanity. Indeed. to use the
language of another, "He was the vain
est man of his time; he was even vain Of
his vanity, But it must be remembered
that Cicero. one of the greatest of the
Roman lawyers, and an elegant gentle
man; Pliny, writer and critic who is
the equal of Tacitus. were intensely
vain; that Anan, whose pages exhibit
all the learning and polish of ancient
Greece, paused in the midst of one Of
his charming addresses to inform his
audience that he himself is as eminent
among the Greeks for eloquence as AL
exander the Great IS for war" Some
one has said that vanity is badge of
greatness, and self-confidence, the pro-
peller of the intellect.
On the trial of the case of the Nerei-
des in the United States District Court.
Mr.. ,Pinto's part Of her cargo was con-
demned. An appeal was taken to the
United States Circuit Court, where the
judgment of condemnation was affirmed.
and the case went by appeal to the
United States Supreme Court. when that
court was, for the first time, called upon
to decide the question whether neutral
property forfeits its character of neu-
trality by being put on board of an
armed ship Of the enemy. The case
came up for argument on March Is.
1916.
Mr.. Pinkney's appearance al, the bar
on that occasion was unusually attrac-
tive. He had long been brilliant lum-
mary before the American people. With