EDITOR'S WALLET.

Otago Witness, Issue 1956, 20 August 1891, Page 41

EDITOR'S WALLET.

Amusing Answers of Witnesses*

It has sometimes happened that a lawyer has, in the language of the street, " given himself away " to a smart adversary. Garrow did this once when examining a witness in the Court of Queen's Bench. " Are you a fortune-teller?" he asked. "I am not," replied the man; "but I can tell yours." TJ^B^shrewd counsel tripped, and was worsted. " What is that to be 1 " said he. " Why, sir," was the sly response, " as you made your first speech at the Old Bailey, so you will make your last there." In like manner, arguing before a jury of judges, an over-smart counsel stopped short in his pleading. He was confident of obtaining a successful result, and Lord Newton vexed him by seeming to be in deep slumber. Addressing the other lords on the bench, he said: "My Jords, it is unnecessary to go on, as Lord Newton is fast asleep." What was his consternation when au answer came : " Ay, ay," cried the angry judge, "you will have proof of that by-and-bye." And to the astonishment and chagrin of the young advocate, and the intense interest of others, Newton luminously reviewed the case, and gave a decided judgment against the too sanguine counsel.

Even the cleverest lawyers have been " set down " in open court by equally ready witnesses. "Did you see this tree that has been mentioned by the roadside 1 " an advocate inquired. " Yes, sir; I saw it very plainly." " It was conspicuous, then 1 " The witness seemed puzzled by the new word. He repeated his former assertion. Sneered the lawyer: "What is the difference between plain and conspicuous ? " But he was hoist with his own petard. The witness snroothly and innocently answered : " I can see you plainly, sir, amongst the other lawyers, though you are not a bit conspicuous." In another comical instance the attack was directed against the oharaoter of the

witness. But it recoiled. " You were in the company of these people ? " "Of two friends, sir." " Friends ! two thieves, I suppose you mean." " That may be so," was the dry retort, " they are both lawyers." The blow that destroys the effect of an adverse examination is occasionally more accident than conscious effort. In a trial not long ago, a very simple witness was in the box ; and, after going through his ordeal, was ready to retire. One question remained. "Now, Mr — i— , has not an attempt been made to induce you to tell the court a different Story ? " "A different story to what I have told, sir ? " " Yes ; is it not so 1 " " Yes, sir." " Upon your oath, I demand to know who the persons are who have attempted this ? " " Well, sir, you've tried as hard as any of 'em," was the unexpected answer. It ended the examination.