The Lake County times. [volume] (Hammond, Ind.) 1906-1933, 1906-07-20
SLIPS OF iNOVELISIS
LEGAL MISTAKES THAT HAVE BEEN
MADE BY GREAT AUTHORS.

Bardel1 Versus PielxsBiel-The Trial
scene In ReaGe's "Hard Cash.
TrolIope's Dip Into the Law.
Legal fctions," says one OF Gilberts
gondoliers. are solemn things" Yet
it is curious how seldom a novelist
ventures into a law court without driv-
ing his quill through acts of parliament
and rules of law alike
That Dickens knowledge of law. like
Mr.. Wellers of London. was 'exten-
siye and peculiar" is amply demon
strated by the famous case of Bardel
versus Pickwick. Students of that re
port may have been struck by the fact
that neither plaintiff nor defendant APP
peared in the witness box. The ex-
PLANTATION is that at that time parties
upon the record" were not competent
witnesses. their interest in the case be
ing regarded as too strong a tempta-
ton to. shall we say. inaccuracy. But
had Dickens been a lawyer Mr.. Wrinkle
and his friends might also have been
( spared the ordeal of cross examination
q
prived of many merry moments.
4 In his anxiety to satirize the abuses
Y OF cross examination Dickens over
/ looked the legal rule that the counsel
4 who calls witness is not permitted to
/ cross examine him at all, but, on the
contrary, is bou ID by his answers,
1 therefore had SERGEANT Buzfuz permit
/ ted the Pickwickians to be called as
witnesses for the plaintiff (Which he
would have known better than to do)
Z their version of the words heard
I through the door ION the jar" must
/ have been accepted, and at the first at
1 tempt to badger either Of them 1t would
have been the learned counsel for the
/ plaintiff who received his lordship's In
4 junction ito be careful.
/ But all lovers of Dickens will rejoice
at his ignorance of the rule which
+ forces counsel never to call a hostile
witness Who could bear to be depriv-
| ed of the evidence Of Mr.. Samuel Wei
1 Ter?
Exactly the same mistake is made by
Anthony Trollope in his we'll known
novel, 1.-The Three Clerks" There the
hero, Alaric Tudor, is placed upon his
trial for misappropriating trust money
and defended by that famous leader,
Mr.. Chaffanbrass of the Old Bailey.
Tudor's Mephistopheles, the Hon. I'm
deoimus Scott, is called, much against
his will, as a witness for the defense,
cross examined by the celebrated Chat
fanbrass, forced to confess his mis-
deeds and dismissed covered with
ignominy, to be subsequently expelled
/ from his club-poetic justice which
would have been defeated even by a
chairman of quarter sessions.
The great theoretical and practical
1 knowledge of law possessed by Charles
Reade saved him from this error, as
\ from many others. Yet the famous
trial scene in Hard CASH would have
been ruthlessly deprived of its most
dramat': moment by any judge of the
! high ,urt When the hapless Alfred
Har who has been wrongfully i'm
pri ned in an asylum by his wicked
father, comes at last to establish his
sanity before a jury, his case is closed
/ by the reading of a letter from his
dead sister. Writing at the point of
death, she solemnly denies his insanity
and begs him to show her words to his
accusers when she is no more. Read
aloud by the Judge himself her letter
reduces a crowded court to tears and
goes far to secure her brother a trium-
plant verdict, with heavy damages.
Hard Cash" is termed "a matter OF
I fa 0f rnr lint q a Oft for. lf a n
and law, no such letter could have been
received in evidence. Knowing that
under ordinary circumstances. such
testimony would be inadmissible
Reade is careful to establish that the
writer knew herself to be dying; but
he was unaware that dying declara
ton" is only admissible in evidence
upon a charge of murder or man
slaughter of the person who has made
it. and cannot be laid before the jury
in any other case whatever.
Numerous and entertaining are the
trial scenes which adorn the works OF
Mrs. Henry Wood. but they hardly pro
fess TO be strictly accurate. Let ms
point. rather, to an Interesting slip or
the part of that most careful of nov
elists, David Christie Murray. wht
shares to some extent the popular con
fusion on the subject Of the law o.
libel and Islander. His powerful story
"A Capful O. Nails" has for its here
q working mailer. who becomes al
agitator on behalf Of his much op
pressed class. In consequence of
speech denouncing an inscription
employer he Is prosecuted on a charg,
of criminal libel: but, thanks to a faith
full friend and a smart lawyer, b,
energies triumphantly.
No fault can be found in this cas-
with the way in which the villain /
cross examined to pieces. The diff
Guilty is that no such prosecution couli
have been instituted at all. You ma,
SANDER man by defamatory speech
but to libel him you must write. prin
or otherwise Derfna nenfIv record" Won