The Editor's Bag "Yes, sir; I sees that, but I didn't write that." "You mean to tell the Judge here that you didn't write that there," growled the lawyer. "No, sir, Judge, I didn't — I didn't — I didn't write that, Judge. I jes' dic tated it." The jurors filed into the jury box, and after all the twelve seats were filled there still remained one juror standing outside. "If the Court please," said the Clerk, "they have made a mistake and sent us thirteen jurors instead of twelve. What do you want to do with this extra one?" "What is your name," asked the judge of the extra man. "Joseph A. Braines," he replied. "Mr. Clerk," said the Judge, "take this man back to the jury commis sioners and tell them we don't need him as we already have here twelve men without Braines." "Now, your Honor," began the shrewd, grizzled old attorney, "this has been a long and tedious trial, but it becomes very simple when resolved down to its basic elements. Let us see what we have here. There is the old bachelor, with no known relatives. Then there is the middle-aged woman, and the young man, both of whom the old bachelor takes a special interest in, whatever it may be. The old bachelor is wealthy, and he dies, leaving to this middle-aged woman, the defendant here, his fortune of $200,000, and to the young man, the plaintiff here, so much thereof as she herself, the defendant, shall elect. Those are the very words of the will. That makes it very simple. Now, all the pleadings here, the testi mony introduced, and the admissions of the defendant herself on the witness-
stand, show that she has chosen and elected out of the immense fortune, $190,000, and has given the boy only $10,000. That is clear, undisputed, and admitted by the pleadings and by the defendant herself. Upon those facts, and upon the will itself, the whole case becomes very simple. You see this will expressly provides that this son shall have so much thereof as this lady here shall elect. She having elected $190,000, the plaintiff asks for that as his just share of the estate. Upon that state of facts, the plaintiff rests his whole case." "Why did your husband strike you that time," interrupted the Judge of the Chicago woman who was suing for divorce. "Why — he — he said I was flirt ing," she answered, demurely. "Well — were you flirting?" piquantly asked the Judge. "Why, Judge," she replied, with all the glow of her coal-black eyes full upon him, "I am looking at you now — am I flirting with you?" Cornelius Johnson. OLD PROHIBITION LAWS IN 1654 the General Court of Con necticut ordered the confiscation of "all Barbadoes liquer commonly called 'Ruin Kill Devill' which shall be landed within the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth." The order was di rected against the growing practice of selling intoxicants to the Indians. But six years before the Court had found it necessary to check the indul gence of white men in wine and strong drink. It had therefore ordered : "That no inhabitant in any town should con tinue in a tavern or victualling-house in the town in which he lived more than half an hour at a time, drinking wine, beer, or hot water."