but whose horizon is bounded by the limits of the back-yard, where the children play, and whose knowledge of the world is colored by the narratives of neighbors or the partial judgments of their husbands. The second embraces those who have had some expe rience in the courts, the remembrance of which only intensifies the irritation and chagrin inflicted by defeat. A good measure of the mortification is due to the recollection of the failure to make good the prediction, "When I get into court I 'll handle that lawyer on the other side without gloves if he tries to make any trouble for me." Those who compose these two classes advocate the abolition of all tribunals and the repeal of all laws. They hope for a kind of poetical mil lennium; they talk as if lawyers created the courts, and were responsible for the deport ment of those whose misfortunes are due to their own indiscretion and folly. They con cur in the sentiment which the poet attri butes to Rob Roy, — "What need of books? Burn all the statutes and their shelves; They stir us up against our kind, And worse, against ourselves." They advance their extravagant theories in disregard of the teaching of history, that some provision is necessary for the adjust ment of differences so long as human nature and human actions make differences possible. Much has come to us from sacred and pro fane history illustrative of the necessity of tribunals designed to afford relief or redress to the helpless and unfortunate. Reference may well be made to the stirring life of Saint Paul. What suggestive pathos there is in those words in the last chapter of 2 Timothy, which declare that at the first defence all men forsook him! The chapter itself is partly a recital of wrongs inflicted by his prejudiced opponents. There is another narrative in the life of the same great man which presents a graphic incident illustrative of the need of courts for the hearing and determination of causes. Aroused by the
artfully expressed apprehensions of Deme trius, the people of Ephesus rushed into the theatre and gave vent to the senseless clamor so characteristic of a mob. " Some therefore cried one thing, and some another; for the assembly was confused, and the more part knew not wherefore they were come to gether." But the man of authority made himself heard; as the tumult ceased, he re minded his hearers of the security afforded by law; and certainly no words could have . been chosen more fitting to the occasion or more likely to pacify the throng than these: "If Demetrius and the craftsmen which are with him have a matter against any man, the law is open, and there are deputies; let them implead one another. But if ye enquire anything concerning other matters, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly." Finally, the lawyer is denounced for deplet ing his client's purse. The legal profession seems to be regarded as an institution for the furtherance of merciless exactions. Most people make no allowance for the principles of average and discrimination; they believe not only that the lawyer charges all that he thinks that he can get, but that in most cases he obtains very much more than his services are worth. The truth is, the income of the average lawyer who may be called successful is only about a third of what he is generally believed to make; and we assert that the remuneration which in most cases seems so large to the world is, when considered in the light of analysis, no more disproportionate to the service rendered than is the amount of the ordinary workman's wages to the benefit which his labors confer. Let us ap proach the subject in the spirit of fairness. The successful practice of law is almost im possible without the faculty to grasp and assimilate facts and ideas, which faculty is made more active and serviceable by the aid derived from a liberal education. There are however exceptions to the rule, as there are eminent lawyers of the present day who were not so situated in their early years as to avail themselves of the advantages af
