Under a stunted black elm tree The Q.C.’s chambers are; Q.C., a leading silk is he, With name known near and far; And the practice he’s contrived to make Is famous at the bar. His wig is crisp, and soiled, and black―― That’s where the ink once ran―― His eye is bright, and apt to roll, ’Tis his most favourite plan; And he looks a jury in the face As very few men can. Week in, week out, from ten till four, You can hear his language flow; You can see him hitch his gown and swing His arm with motion slow, Like a ranter beating the Holy Book With a downright thumping blow! And country people up in town Look in at the Law-court’s door; For they like to see the great Q.C., And hear his voice’s roar; And ’tis thought a bit of luck to catch Him standing on the floor. He sits on Sundays in his rooms, And “tots” up his week’s fees; He thinks on those he hasn’t earned, And had no right to seize: And much it makes his heart rejoice As he turns over these. He thinks of verdicts he has won, By torture and by lies; Of verdicts lost through his default Thoughts will unbidden rise: Through one a widow lost her all, He seems to hear her sighs. Toiling――speechmaking――circuiting, Onward through life he goes; Each evening sees some briefs begun, How many? goodness knows! Something attempted, some one “done,” He’s earned a night’s repose. Thanks, thanks to thee, my legal friend, For the lesson thou hast taught! That fortune quickly comes to one Who does what he “didn’t ought;” And that taking fees for work not done Is a very “happy thought.” _Finis_ (Beeton’s Christmas Annual, 1877.) In a recent trial for libel brought against the son of the Lord Chief Justice, the plaintiff had to conduct his case in person, and was subjected to continual interruptions, and hostile remarks from the bench. This conduct on the part of the judge, Mr. Justice Manisty, was even more noticeable than his contemptuous treatment of the verdict of the jury, and the following parody of a Law Report (which appeared in the _Pall Mall Gazette_, November 25, 1884)――is really but a mild exaggeration of the actual proceedings:―― TRIAL BY JURY IN 1884. The libel case of ―――― _versus_ ―――― was tried in the Court of ――――, before Mr. Justice Manifest. The plaintiff conducted his own case; the defendant was represented by his counsel, a great legal luminary, and several of the most prominent names at the bar. The defendant is the son of a person high placed in the legal world, and is himself a barrister. The plaintiff is, vernacularly speaking, “the deuce knows who.” The alleged libel is contained in a letter written by the defendant to a widow lady (his great aunt by marriage), who wished to ally herself by marriage to the plaintiff.