CHARLES JOSEPH BONAPARTE cases it can only be discharged by the expen diture of considerable time, labor, and profes sional skill, for which little or no pecuniary compensation may be expected, and each member of the Bar ought, therefore, to feel himself morally bound to discharge his fair proportion of such unprofitable work. Mr. Bonaparte has always sought to do his full share, and in estimating what his share may be, he is careful not to give short measure. From his youth upwards, Mr. Bonaparte has always seemed to possess a great fascina tion for "cranks" of various kinds, many of whom doubtless attracted by his historic family name, favor him from time to time with amusing epistolary communications, and some of them with personal visits. In deed, for the last thirty years, his offices have been at intervals invaded by a series of queer, would-be clients, the like of whom are rarely to be found outside of Dickens' novels. They come so frequently and re main so long that for years Mr. Bonaparte has been obliged, in self-defense, to deny admittance to any one until he has first communicated his name and business to his secretary. Many of these "cranks" have law cases which they submit to Mr. Bonaparte and desire him to prosecute. Some of these cases are nothing more nor less than mere midsummer madness; but others appear upon their faces to be meri torious, and are sometimes supported by documents apparently genuine, which give them a presumptive plausibility. Mr. Bona parte examines all such cases with much patience, and when they seem to have any thing at all in them, he will either under take them himself or perhaps send the would-be client with a letter of introduc tion to some other member of the Bar, emi nent in the particular branch of the profes sion which appears most applicable to the case. Mr. Bonaparte's first political case arose out of the State election held November 2, 1875, which was carried in Baltimore City by the Democratic "ring," then having full
399
control of matters here, through the use of such an amount of violence, fraud, and ballot-box stuffing as to scandalize the en tire community, Democrats as well as Re publicans. After the returns had been made public, the several candidates for the legis lature from the three legislative districts of Baltimore City, who had been counted out, gave notice to their opponents, who had been counted in, of their intention to con test their seats and to take testimony for that purpose before a justice of the peace, as provided by statute. Six counsel were retained, two to represent the contestants from each district, and Mr. Bonaparte, then as now a resident of Baltimore County, and who, although a Republican in politics, had from personal friendship cast his vote for the Democratic candidate for governor, was selected as one of them. Although a much younger man than any of the other counsel for the contestants — he was under twentyfive years of age and had been little more than a year at the Bar — he was by a sort of natural selection soon pushed forward as the leading counsel for the contestants and the greater part of the work and respon sibility was cast upon his shoulders. The contestants' main reliance for the establish ment of their case was upon an inspection of the ballots cast at the election, which had been kept in the custody of the clerk of the Superior Court of Baltimore City, and which they contended would show the number of "pudding" tickets in the boxes that had been counted, and the great difference be tween the number of ballots to be found in the boxes and the number of votes returned by the judges of election as having been cast. The clerk was summoned to produce these ballot boxes before the magistrates who were taking the testimony, but he re fused to do it, and the contestants filed a petition in the Baltimore City Court for a mandamus requiring him to do so. The ap plication was resisted by the clerk who was represented by Bernard Carter, Esq., then regarded as one of the ablest lawyers at our
