Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1911-12-12
DEFENDING A
GUILTY CLIENT.
Lawyer Faces Delicate Situation When He
Knows the Accused Committed the Crime.

mere was case IN Wnlcn TWO law
lyers did all possible for their clients,
and yet they did it without resorting
to bubble or chicanery.
In marked contrast to the conduct of
those cases was the defense Of John
Henry Collins, who murdered his faith
er in Topeka There was no doubt OF
his guilt either, but in his defense wit
nesses were put upon the stand who
again went upon the stand before the
close Of the case and stated under oath
that they had been induced to swear
falsely. In spite of all the quibbling
and the efforts to defeat justice in his
case the jury convicted him, but his
defense was long a subject Of adverse
comment by high-minded lawyers.
In marked contrast to the conduct of
the Myers and Hoffman cases Is that
more recent case Of Ricord, the young
man who lured the Chamberlain girl
to a lonely spot near Shady Bend,
Kan, and tarred her. The lawyer de-
Tending the guilty men in that affair
quibbled and lodged and threw dust
in an effort to blind justice.
Benjamin Butler, once governor of
Massachusetts, set an example to law
yers that followed after him that has
been condemned by lawyers of high
ideals and initiated by the other class.
He took the position that a lawyer had
"a right to take the case Of any person.
no matter how guilty, and to do ev-
erything possible within the law to
clear him.
At one time he was retained for a
large fee to defend burglar named
Record, who had been guilty of Sc
ries of amazingly daring burglaries,
and who, after escaping arrest for a
long time was captured in the very
act of taking key out of a door. The
key had been left in the keyhole by
the house owner during the daytime,
and the evident intention Of the bur-
glar was to carry away the key and
return at night while the household
was asleep and enter by means Of the
same key.
The only charge that could be put
against him was one of larceny Of the
key, as he had not entered the dwell
ing. In his defense Butler pleaded
that key was part Of a door, a door
was part of a house, a house was real
estate, and therefore no conviction was
possible because larceny covered only
the stealing of personal property, and
not the stealing of real estate, and the
key was certainly real estate. The
prisoner was discharged under this
plea
Another time Butler was retained to
defend one Hayward, a noted burglar,
who was seen by a constable forcibly
to enter railroad depot. The consta-
BILE followed to arrest him, and the
burglar seeing no means Of escape, de-
liberately shot and killed the consta-
ble Butler discovered that almost the
only kind of building not covered by
statute making a burglarious entry
felony, was a railway depot, therefore
he pleaded in defense of the murderer
that in entering the depot he had not
committed an offense for which he
might have been arrested without a
warrant, and that. as the constable
had no warrant for his arrest, he had
no right to make the arrest, and that
in resisting him Hayward was not re-
sisting legal arrest, but had a right in
law to shoot in his own defense. This
plea saved the accused.
1t is this sort Of sharp practice,
more prevalent today than in the time
of Butler, that has brought disrepute
to the legal profession as a class.
Frederick Trevor Hill said recently:
THE lawyers are very much in need
to see themselves as the public sees
them, as legal jugglers, defeaters of
the law and Knockers of it's majesty"
There has been a great deal Of vir-
tuous denunciation by the legal pro-
fession recently in Kansas City of the
legal "snitch" or ambulance chaser"
The snitch is an adjunct to the busi-
ness of the lawyer who makes a prac-
tice of taking personal injury suits
against corporations.
But many corporation lawyers are
equally as unethical in their practice
as the snitch. He is trained in his
side of the law until he knows every
decision pertaining to his business. He
goes into the trial with but one definite
purpose, to trick the court into some
error which will upset the verdict on
appeal. Equipped as he is, he general
ly succeeds in Turing the judge into
some technical mistake in passing
hurriedly on the multitude of objec-
tions, requests, motions and exceptions
which he makes and if the verdict is
against him he can sit back and laugh
in his sleeve as it is rendered, knowing
that it will be reversed in the appellate
court.
1t is interesting to observe one OF
these professional 'exceptioners" al
work during a trial of a murder case
or a damage suit against large cor
poration.
The professional "exceptioner' en-
gagged in the case for no other reason
except his nose for errors and his
deftness in Turing the court into tech
nical mistakes, sits beneath the shad-
ow of the judges bench and apparent
ly asleep. But he is never asleep. He
sits with closed eyes, but he is listen
ing, listening, with every sense alert
Suddenly he pops up with an eXcep-
ton, and when he has made 1t he
drops down again and sinks into ap-
parent somnolence. He objects to
everything. Half the time of the court
is taken up in noting his exceptions
And he often defeats the verdict OF
the jury after weeks and even months
of costly litigation. 1t was so in the
last trial of DR.. Hyde.
Justice David Brewer used to tel
| a story of one of these "exceptiOnerS'