Another remarkable case occurred at Durham. On this occasion, Scott,
though a junior counsel, was appointed to lead by his seniors, the case
being relative to collieries, and he being a Newcastle man. When Buller
the judge, who was a coarse man, and fond of saying abrupt things, saw
him, he said, "Sir, you have not a leg to stand upon." Scott answered,
"My lord, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, I should sit down on
hearing the judge so express himself; but so persuaded am I that I have
the right on my side, that I must entreat your lordship to allow me to
reply, and I must also express my expectation of gaining a verdict." He
replied, and the jury, after consulting six or eight hours, gave the
verdict in his favour. When he went to the ball that evening, he was
received with open arms by every one.
When he went to Carlisle, Buller sent for him, and told him that "he had
been thinking over that case on his way from Newcastle, and that he had
come to the conclusion that he was entirely wrong, and that I was right.
He had, therefore, sent for me to tell me this, and to express his
regret for having attempted to stop me in court. This cause," said Lord
Eldon, "raised me aloft."
Yet this man, with all his ability, had already attended the Cumberland
assizes for seven years without receiving a brief. After the celebrity
of this cause, when he next attended, he received seventy guineas in
fees at Carlisle.
So much has been said in parliament, and in the newspapers lately, of
_Gentlemen of the Turf_, and the very dubious nature of that
appellation, that the following case comes curiously in point. A
question arose as to the winner of the stakes in a race--there having
been a condition, that the horses should be ridden by gentlemen; and it
was disputed whether the winning horse had been ridden by a gentleman or
not. The judge finally addressed the jury in these words--"Gentlemen of
the jury, when I see you in that box I call you gentlemen, for I know
you are such. Custom has authorized me, and, from your office there, you
are entitled to be called gentlemen; but out of that box, I do not know
what may be deemed the requisites that constitute a gentleman--therefore
I can give you no direction," (a laugh.) The jury returned a verdict
that he was not a gentleman. The next morning he challenged the two
counsel, Law and Scott. They answered, they could not possibly fight one
who had been pronounced by the verdict of a jury to be no _gentleman_.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account