"I frequently held briefs for the Government of Canada, whose general retainer I held, and also other briefs from Canada," said Sir Francis, "and one of these gave rise to a dramatic incident. I was instructed to apply to the Privy Council for leave to appeal on account of some technical flaws in a trial for murder in Canada--the man having been convicted. Whilst I was arguing and hoping to make a good impression on the Court, a telegram was put into my hands. It read: 'So-and-so (the criminal) was hanged by order of the Governor-General at nine o'clock this morning'! It did not seem necessary to continue the argument after that. I recollect my point: it was that the case had never been sent before a grand jury! "Ballantine! Yes. I was on several occasions associated with him. He was the most brilliant cross-examiner I ever heard--I don't say the best, for he never knew his brief. But his tact and readiness were extraordinary. I remember a divorce suit in which the husband petitioned against the wife. Ballantine and I appeared for the petitioner. The evidence was very much in favour of the wife as given by her maid--a very modest, unassuming girl. It came to Ballantine's turn to cross-examine. "'What shall I ask her?' he said to me. "At that moment somebody at the back of the court--I never found out who--whispered to me: 'She had an illegitimate child while in her late mistress's service!' "I whispered this on to Ballantine, adding that I knew of no ground whatever for the imputation. He got up--and something like the following took place: "Ballantine: 'I believe something serious happened whilst you were in your late mistress's service?' "Maid: 'Yes, sir.' "'Something very serious?' "'Yes, sir.' "'I believe you left?' "'Yes, sir.' "'When you left, did she mention it to your new mistress?' "'No, sir.' "'If she had done so, do you think you would have got your present situation?' "'No, sir.' "'If she were to mention it, do you think your mistress would keep you?' "'No, sir.' "Ballantine sat down. Sir John Karslake, for the respondent, thought it best not to re-examine, and Lord Hannen, in summing up, remarked that no doubt there might be something in the matter to which Serjeant Ballantine had referred, which might induce the girl to desire to stand well with her mistress, and Sir John Karslake had not felt inclined to re-examine! We won our case. The real truth, I believe, was that something--some article or the other--had been lost, and the girl was supposed to have been implicated in it. [Illustration: LORD BROUGHAM'S LETTER.] "I have had doubts since whether the tactics were perfectly defensible--but you see the skill. Absolutely nothing was risked, because it would have been easy to retreat if the first answer had been unfavourable. A blundering advocate would have blurted out the offensive suggestion, got an indignant negative, set the judge and jury against him, and been considered a brute.