Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 13.pdf/318
they were always supplied, to help them on their way and over the mountains.
The latchstring of every cabin door hung out, inviting them to enter, eat, drink and be merry. "Git off yer horse and look at yer saddle," was the mountaineer's usual salutation and welcome greeting. The lawyers after sharing his hospitality were careful not to insult their host by offering him any remuneration for their board and lodging. They were familiar with his eccentricity and yet not disposed to get something for nothing. And therefore in a politic way, when the host was supposed not to be looking, they slipped their coins into the hands of the house-wife who had made for them the sweet ash-cakes and good corn-dodger bread.
In those days the lawyers on the circuit carried their law libraries in their saddle bags. Tucker's Commentaries, Russell on Crimes, and Greenleaf on Evidence were the principal treatises from which they obtained their law learning, and with this artillery they bombarded Judge and jury.
Tucker's Commentaries were the lawyer's vade mecum. Seldom did any Judge have the temerity to rule contrary to any authority found within the lids of those books. There is a story current in this section that a certain attorney, stimulated for the great legal effort he was about to make, was once proceeding, contrary to the ruling of the presiding Judge, to argue to the jury a "point of law," and in support of his, the attorney's legal opinion, to read from his favorite author, when the Judge sternly interrupted him:—"Mr. S., the Court has ruled on that point and the Court's ruling is the law which governs this case. And you will quit arguing contrary to the ruling of this Court, or take your seat."
"I understand your Honor's ruling." replied the attorney, "and that it is the law of this case, so far as your Honor's Court is concerned; but I beg permission to read a short paragraph from this book, not to contradict your Honor's ruling, but to show you what a dd fool Judge Tucker was." The principal capital on which most at torneys then did business was their oratorical powers, rather than a thorough knowledge of the law acquired from the current text books.
The verdict was frequently the result of an eloquent speech and not according to the merits of the case; and judgment on this verdict ended the litigation.
Seldom did an attorney take his case to a higher court. It was easier and more con genial to argue the case orally in open court, than out of the court-room and presence of the listening and admiring throng to prepare the written bills of exceptions and record necessary to obtain an appeal or writ of error. The native West Virginia lawyer is a natural orator, and in this respect compares favor ably with attorneys hailing from many other States.
It is not easy to give the reason why. The mountain air and scenery seem to inspire the fearless independent spirit that he has inherited from his Virginia ancestry, and to make him eloquent and plausible when arguing what is neither law nor logic. The ad vocate gifted with an eloquent tongue is prone to wander from the record, especially in the trial of criminal cases. An apt illustration of this tendency was recently observed by the writer in the trial of a Hatfield murder case in the County of M., on the border between West Virginia and Kentucky. Governor W. had been retained for the defence, and Colonel T. for the prosecution, both able and eloquent lawyers. The former during the two hours he argued be fore the jury seemed inspired. In glowing colors he portrayed the innocence of the prisoner, and then in the darkest hues the murderous intent and guilt of the deceased at the time of the tragedy. He reversed the tables on the prosecution, placed the de ceased on trial and convicted him before the jury. His argument was to some extent based on matters not in evidence. Had the case gone to the jury at the conclusion of his argument, the prisoner would doubtless