The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1910-03-13

IlNNEmE1
IL 70 evident that he regards tho practice
a. useful in many cases and generally
communicable wsndsll Phillips when
student az Harvard was In ths habit 81
declaiming B,irke's speerhes In the CAM
bridge woods. and Edward Everett de-
claimed HIS own Addresses before a mirror.
while Lord Mansfield spoke not only In
front % a looking Elas- hut In the pres
encs of frisnd who acted ~ a censor II
n impossible ON the other hand Co imagine
Abraham Lincoln engaged In any s'''h
methods u preparation for his uiaeranoes
ON pubic occasions
Valuable - are the introductory por-
tons OF thia book. IL 10 when the author
has HE young advocate fully trained and
ready for work snd wksn the trial begins
that We come to what We may character
Inc a. the -meaty- parts u the volume.
The practical advice and suggestions and
hints really constitute a generous contri-
hutton Of knowledge 20 the service OF his
fellow mambsrs Of the bar. A trial lawyer
Of long and varied sSPerience Who has
attained marked success in his railing thus
gives TO his juniors the b~neflt Of what he
himself has learned; and be has learned
much. We may say generally and with
ont reserve that IL the authors ideas In
regard co the conduct Of jury trials we're
faithfully carried into effect by those mo~t
actively concerned In the administration
Of justice the growing tendency 60 look
upon Law and lawyers with disfavor would
be speedily and absolutely checked
II would undoubtedly BE- . great ad-
vantage 80 trial lawyers 10 thsy we're
allowed occasionally to serve n jurymen
and thus acquire q personal knowbedge
Of the arguments and influences which
control verdicts. Many years ago In the
New York County Court House the
deliberations OF the jurors In the Superior
Court were audible in the Clerks once
by reason Of the peculiar construction
of the lofty corridors which extended
from one floor to the other. Mr.. Boese.
the venerable clerk whose genial char
acter 10 remembered with affection by
tho older msmbers &C the har. once in
vitsd MIR. wellman when no WIS Assistant
Corporation Counsel to listen 70 his jury
while IL waa discussing = case which
Ne had just finished wh~re . lady had
fallen on the sidewalk and had sued the
city for damages resulting from the
bodily injuries ahe had thus sustained.
MfUNNEtNhSaAt
shefore 80 consider tho evidence there
are some important questions Of Law for
us 10 decide Upon which another juror
vas heard to exclaim In q loud voice:
oh. to hell with the Law, How much
will We give the Eirlr- To the cynic
this might SEEM like a strong argument
agains, the system Of trial Ivy jury. hut
we are pleased to observe that Mr.. Well
man has no prejudioe against the jury
system when in,elhgeDtiy administered.
and We rejoice particularly At the good
word he has 60 say concerning New York
iurie-: I arm bound 20 say that in ray
Judgment the meshod of selecting "a jury
I'm vogue at the present time in oyr N"W
York county courts and the class Of men
that are inpanelled ~ serve upon our
juries are far superior % any other healthy
OF tribunal that am acquainted with
A. jury trials are nos consi,Irtsd the
counsel for the plaintiff or prosecution
op@ns the case on his side and examines
all HE witness before there IN any clear
and explicit ssatsm.,nt tn the jury 40 Ia
the nature of ib" defence. The jurors
may got some idea ot what the defence -
from the questions pIt 20 them when the
Jury 10 being inpa nelled or from the cross
sxauiina ton O1 the plaintiffs Witnesses:
hut ne agree with the author that as
soon a. the plaintiffs counsel has eN-
plainsd his side OF he case and bslore
anv evidence has be-n introduced de-
PENDANTS counsel ought to he givel an
opportunity q open his case and 'ell what
the clssence IL. - that the Jury can re- Ilizs
what he issue - from the very s,ar,."
Either ihis. or the Judge presiding AT the
trial might h.. required - civ" ~" Jury
a brief SYNOPSIS 10 tho plsadings IN non
technical lang1ag,. which would answer
the same purpose. Haze are practical
suggestions 81 reform which otIr har as
aociations iniRht ponder Nj IA prof.
The opening 10 the jury shDuli ~. sim
ple nsrrativc 81 the facts ~ the cs=a a. the
plant. n believes them u eSiS' II stDuld
cont am ne argument. for ~ 80 th@re -
nothing 20 argue al,out n should D"
tamp~rai =. aud Assert nothing that caunot
10 ,---1bl,s1~I ~ proof ExaGE~rati'n
IN the yy,.uing - too apt fo ~. fatal An
old LAWYER once sad In r-spnn-" - rD-
cnmiIm- upon IN" wonde ful Op'-uing
made nv his jnnlor aS-0,,iAts YES. he has
ot,.ned the case 80 " ." that all he'll can't
close ~ NJ Wrl,ulsn thinks It u poor
practice 10 take the story 81 each witness
..naratelv and rshrar~r !; 90 the jury, lAIt
prefers 20 narrstA Tho ra-a or his side a
whole and Iet the jury piece together the
statements - tho several witnesses No
doub' this method t~ni~ nos; 3" maintain
the ints-"s, 10 the jurors a. tho facts ara
gradually d~vcIopsl. which - lacking
Nhen they are apprissd in advance pre-
cisely what testimony TO eSp~ct from each
person who takes the stand
We agre- with IN. author that trial
Judges ought 20 be more liberal than they
usually are in allowing leading questions
TO he asked upon IN" direct examination
Of witnesses m respect to ell matters sS-
cept tho vital issues in the case. The
rule that leading questions must not no
asked on the direct examination. that IL.
questions which suggest the answer az
: pected or desired. has no application 60
facts prelimins ~ To the isTuc. such Rs ~"
residence Of the witness. his Rge. occupa-
.tion, cars-r end many othc- ciTcum-