The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-09-19
NOVEL POINTS OF THE LAW.

NOVEL POINTS OF THE LAW.
The question as 20 whether q lawyer
should defend n prisoner whom he be
Icves to be guilty has just been raised
before Justice Darling In England In 8
cas- In which the court protested
against the notion that an attorney II
under ~ oSiisntion to cease TO conduct
a case he knows to be bad. Justice
Darling asked III an advocate In the
course Of a trial for murder comes &c
recognize that his client Is guilty. II he
to say to the court. Hang my client?''
Lar Notes says on the subject:
10 lawyers this counter query witt
It's sclf-evident response effectually
places beyond the realm OF argument
the original question. They know that
when once embarked on a case they
cannot retire therefrom without the con-
sent Of the client or the court. and to
come before The latter with a revelation
Of facts damaging to the person they
have chosen to defend Is such n breach
Of confidence that no lawyer worthy OF
the name could be found to commit II.
Moreover, ever II a lawyer were himself
willing to commit such perfidy the Law
Itself, having regard to the sacredness
OF the relation subsisting between at
tOrncy and client. would from motives OF
public policy effectually seal his lips.
But how about a lawyer accepting a re-
taincr and voluntarily engaging in the
defence OF an accused person where he
has. prior To- his retention, direct knowl-
edge OF the prisoners guilt, derived. we
VIII say, from the accused's W con-
fession? Is not such a defence highly
unethical and evidence OF a professional
dcpravity In the lawyer who will dare
to undertake IL, the pseudo-moralis'
asks? And Lord Macaulay In his gilt
tering style inquiries. Ca 1t be RICH
that a man should. with a wig on his
head and a band around his neck
do FOR a guinea what. withou'
those appendages. he would think l,
wicked and infamous to do for an EN-
pre- TO this rhetorical question WI
answer simply, 1t can"
Justice Burch of Kansas In Holly vs.
Neodesha "A v THE writer incllnes e
the belief that every one who receive.
water through a meter disputes hi,
water bills, particularly those which
somehow accrue while his house Is close,
and he IL away on a visit or vacation
In Central r. r. of y. J. VS.. Hirsch. ir
INV Nv 'loNNN SAlNul NohiN Va NJ
peals. Third Circuit MAY. 1915. 20;
Fed. Az. It appeared that a passonge'
while standing on the steps of n vesti
bulcd car In "A moving RAIN. to which
position he was invited by the action o
a Daggageman In opening the vestibul
doors under instructions from the con
ducior to let the passenger on at tn,
mex station, should the train be oblige,
20 stop there. was knocked from tn
st ps by The swinging shut OF the yes
Thule dour which the baggageman ha,
neg igertly left unsecured. A rule o
the company posted in the car pro
hibited passengers from going upon tn
platform when the car was moving. ant
II State statute exempted the compan,
from liability for injury to a passenRe
by reason OF" a violation OF such rul,
II was, however. held that while tn
passenger nay rave assumed ordinar
IiSts IN violating the rule he was no
bound 10 anticipate the negligence o
the employee which was the proximat
cause OF his injury, and was not barre'
OF tn right to recover for his injury b,
c~ontributory negligence.
The defendant in Boerner Fry Co. VI
Mucci. before the Supreme Court .
Iowa, complained because the trial cour
NAuN' W i'iili4t NV jury w NhSNt sDnl
ice cream forming one of the exhibits 1
the case. the cour. dec airing that n
abuse OF discretion was shown. La,
Notes reserves opinion as to the sound
ress Of the decision since the recor
does not show nj what time OF the yea
the trial was had
Chief Justice Ailshle OF the Suprem
Court OF Idaho makes the followin
comment In Fall Creek Sheep Co. VI
Walton on the effect OF a statute reiat
ing to trespassing hogs:
The man who drew the amendmen
made swine an exception In the laws q
Idaho from all other kinds Of trespass
ing animals. So now when that Glove
footed quadruped of ancient no,oriet
goes ~foraging beyond the protecting car
Of the swincherd he at once loses hi
character as a domestic animal and be
comes ferp nature. subject to captur
by any one OF whose premises he ma
at any indiscrcet moment And himsel
OF course the hog doesn't care niue
about his character; he would ordina
r.ly Just as soon be treated as n will
animal az to be treated as II he ha
been domesticated for centuries. HI
fate is generally about the same eithe
way"
Lac Notes. expressing regret that tn
Wit nf Judge l.amm OF the Missouri Su
prrme Court has been missing from tn
reports since he retired on January
last. has found a humorous early opinio
Of the jurist which has escaped genera
notice, 1t is In Whiteaker W.. Chicag,
SC, Ry CO.. an action to recover dam
ages for being kiCked on a train. an
the contention Of the defendant that tn
conductor, Drake, was not acting with
the scope of his employment was dis
posed OF as follows:
Are We to airily suppose that Drak
was booting trespassers unknown I
him and with whom he had no persona
quarrel) from his masters rains in tn
night time for the mere fun Of Il? @
like Don QuiNote WAS seeking knight
adventures In rlghting wrongs of other
because Of a fixed idea OF general pei
sOnal duty to mankind COR love {
knightly renown), shading of int
melancholla on the edge? Or was he
monster OF ingrained cruelty with
halit Of wreaking his malice on thos
who stole rides on the freight trains c
his codefendant? Such strained and vi
reasonable views would make posterit
think III Of our understanding as Lor
chief Justice Holt once remarked. W
would have to have the luck incident I
being born with a eau (see David Cor
perficld) to escape such verdict In sue
hypothesis"
A perplcxlng problem In bovine juris
prudence recently taxed the legal a,
tainments Of local %jurists, says II
Portland O%regonidn. A bull and a
automobile tried to occupy the sam
space Mt the same time, in consequence
Of which the bull went to his fnal r,
ward To appear before the Great Hig
Court. whence no appeals lie viii