THE late Robert Malcolm Kerr, judge of the City of London Court, was noted for making most extraordinary remarks in court. Among his famous sayings the following may be recalled; the circumstances which evoked them may be conjectured. "I am not here to lecture upon law; other wise I should be here all day and night teach ing the profession their business." "King David said in his haste 'All men are liars.' If he had sat here as I have for over forty years he would have said it in his leis ure." The moment you, a foreigner, land at Dover, you are supposed to know the whole law of England—which nobody ever knew." "Always put everything into writing. Pens are cheap, ink is cheap, and paper is cheap. "I cannot help costs accumulating. Law yers must live, you know. If you were to es tablish the doctrine that lawyers were only to get a commission on what they recover there would be no adjournments, no refresh ers—no anything. People would be made honest then. It would be a sad thing for the lawyers, but that would not matter." "Counter-claims are an abomination, and are simply the modern substitute for the old dilatory and fradulcnt pleas with which the public were familiar forty years ago.'1 "Never go to law under any circumstances. You had much better lose your money than go to law. As a rule, it only puts money into the pockets of the lawyers—the very worst form in which it can be spent." I KNEW Baron Huddlestone, who always referred to himself as "The Last of the Barons. He told me many interesting things, notably about a curious case tried at Limerick. A man was charged with robbery with violence, at that time a capital offence. While the trial was proceeding, a stranger called at a neighboring inn, apparently holi day making. He inquired of the landlord if there were any interesting places to be visited in the neighborhood and the landlord, after considering, said there was the Assize Court
handy, and, if his customer desired it, he, the landlord, would, through a friend of his, an usher, obtain him admission to the Court. This offer the traveler accepted, and he was duly admitted to the court, which he entered just at the moment when the judge was ask ing the prisoner if he had anything further to urge in his defence. The prisoner, in re sponse, further asserted his innocence, and declared he was miles away from the scene of the assault at the time it occurred. "But," argued the judge, you have no proof of it." Then suddenly the prisoner pointed to the new-comer and exclaimed, "Yes, he can prove it! I was with him on the day, and helped to carry his portmanteau on to a vessel at Dover. The portmanteau came open and a tooth brush fell out, which I put back, after he'd wiped it. Ask him—he can prove it!" The judge questioned the stranger, who said he could not remember, but that he kept a very exhaustive diary, which was at the inn where he was staying, and which no doubt would help them. Accordingly, an officer of the court was dispatched to the inn, and brought back the diary, wherein, on the date men tioned, that of the assault, was an entry con taining all the particulars as given by the pris oner. Upon this the latter was acquitted. Subsequently both men were hanged for sheep-stealing. It was a put-up job, and the stranger was a confederate. Another good story which Huddlestone told me also concerned a charge of robbery with violence. The case for the prosecution rested mainly on the discovery of a "bowler" hat on the scene of the assault, which fitted the prisoner, and which the prosecution as serted belonged to him and proved the crime. But the defence argued that the hat was one in general use and might belong to any num ber of men, and that such evidence was too unreliable on which to commit a man of so serious an offence. The jury felt over-bur dened with- their responsibility and acquitted the prisoner. As the latter was leaving the clock he turned to the judge and said: "My lord, can I 'ave my "at?"—Walter Frith: Can ada Law Journal.
