But it is with the lawyers who practise in the different States of the Union that we have chiefly to deal. An American lawyer, whom we catechized some years ago upon the character of the profession of his country, sapiently and sententiously remarked, "Wal, in America we have lawyers and lawyers." This oracular remark needs some explanation. There is, of course, only one branch of the profession there. Every lawyer, or "counsellor-at-law," to give him his full title, can do any work which is allotted to a solicitor-here, and can appear in any court of his own State and in the Supreme Court. In fact, if we class the two legal professions of England together, and compare them with the one legal profession in the United States, we shall hardly be able to refrain from the trite conclusion that "Pompey and Caesar are very much alike,—especially Pompey." An American lawyer may be a Mr. Benjamin, or he may be a Yankee, Mr. Fogg. But, nevertheless, there are certain marked differences between the two countries which cannot fail to strike the observation, and they are the natural results of the manners and customs of the country in which they arise.
First, then, we can notice how a process of "natural selection" decides which branch of the profession, that of advocacy or administration, a young lawyer adopts. Most men, when at first admitted, naturally take work of any description. The more influential firms, which are composed of older men, usually arrange that some of the partners shall devote themselves to advocacy and some to the routine work. But it must not be supposed in the least that briefs never go out of the firm. In all the chief cities there are many counsellors-at-law who are barristers pure and simple; they receive briefs from all firms and belong to no firm themselves; nor is it unusual for the advocate-member of one firm to be briefed by another, although, of course, the advocate in question considers that his own firm has the "first call" upon his services.
In the next place, a visitor to a court of justice cannot fail to be struck with the utter absence of the ceremonial element. Neither judges nor counsel wear robes of any description. The latter are to be seen arrayed in light suits, sitting down with one leg thrown over a handy chair while they address the judge (who is "Sir," and not "his Lordship"). We were present once in the High Court of New York City on "Motion Day." On a dais at the end of a large plain room, sat an elderly gentleman in a short jacket and a white waistcoat. Round the dais was a semicircular barrier, about three feet high, over which the lawyers leant, with their straw hats dangling in their hands, while they made their applications to the judge. There was much noise of counsel talking together, but the utmost decorum prevailed. This, however, was in the "Empire City," and it must not be forgotten that in many provincial districts the proceedings are of a very primitive nature. The judges who go on circuit in some of the Western States, we hear (but these things, as Herodotus says, when he introduces one of his cock-and-bull stories, we relate only from hearsay), hold their court in the open air, under a big tree, while two rival "colonels" (that is, late volunteers) argue for the respective parties.
With the remarkable genius for advertisement which the nation displays, it is not astonishing that the lower class of lawyers should advertise themselves and their acquirements. We believe that an advertisement like the following is not at all uncommon:—
"COLONEL JEDEDIAH LEE,
COUNSELLOR-AT-LAW,
83 West 42d Street, Cincinnati.
Debts collected with economy and despatch.
Conveyancing executed upon the cheapest terms.
Criminals defended successfully.
(The Colonel secured twenty-three acquittals
during the preceding year.)
The Colonel is always in attendance.
n. b. 5th Floor right. Go up by the elevator. Knock and ring."
