« AnteriorContinuar »
those who would follow in their steps must give their delivery in any event. This we understand to be days and nights to study, and emulate their greatness the distinction drawn by the great body of authorities by emulating their love of labor. In our next number between the two classes of carriers. we shall offer some suggestions as to the best means But in this State the Court of Appeals has attempted of improvement in forensic rhetoric.
to establish a rule ignoring this distinction, and rendering the obligation of the carrier of passengers as extensive as that of the carrier of goods.
In Alden v. The N. Y. Central Railroad Co. (26 N.Y. THE DUTY OF CARRIERS AS TO PROVIDING R. 102), the court lays down the broad proposition that ROAD-WORTHY CARRIAGES.
the passenger carrier is bound, absolutely and irreThe English Court of Exchequer has recently de- spective of negligence, to provide road-worthy cided a case – Redhead v. The Midland Railway Co.
vehicles. In that case the accident was caused by the (20 L. T. Rep. 628) — which is of interest in this breaking of an axle of the car. The weather was, and country, and which will probably hereafter be taken
had been for some time, extremely cold, which tended as a precedent in all cases relating to the liability of
to render the iron brittle. There was a small, old crack carriers of passengers. In that case, the plaintiff,
in the axle, so covered by the wheel that it was absowhilst a passenger on the defendant's road, was in- lutely out of reach of discovery by any practicable jured by an accident, caused by the breaking of the tyre examination of the axle, unless by taking off the of one of the wheels of the car in which he was seated; wheel, with great difficulty and labor. No claim was it was proved that such breaking was owing to an
made that the axle had not been properly manu air-bubble, which could neither be discovered in the factured. course of manufacture nor afterwards, and that in fact
The opinion in the case is very brief and seems to there was no negligence on the part of either the manu
have been prepared without an examination of the facturer or the railway company.
many cases bearing on the question. This may LUSH, J., who tried the case, directed the jury that account for the extraordinary proposition it attempts if the accident could not be foreseen, and was not due
to establish. The judgment is founded on the case of to any fault or carelessness on the part of the defend- Sharp v. Grey (9 Bing. 457), which was the only caso ants, they were entitled to a verdict; and this ruling cited, except that of Hegeman v. The Western Railwas afterwards upheld by MELLOR and Lush, JJ., in road Company, which we shall notice hereafter, and the Queen's Bench, though dissented from by BLACK- | which had evidently no influence in shaping the BURN, J. (Law Rep. 2 Q. B. 412). The Exchequer | opinion of the court. Chamber has now unanimously sustained this judg- If the interpretation given to the case of Sharp v. ment, after a most careful review of both the English Grey by the Exchequer Court in the case of Redhead, and American decisions, and established, so far at least before cited, be correct, it is evident that the judgment as England is concerned, the principle that carriers in the Alden case is unwarranted by it, and stands of passengers are not warranters of the absolute road-without a precedent. Speaking of that case SMITH, J., worthiness of their vehicles, or in other words that
who delivered the opinion of the Exchequer Court, there is no implied contract that their carriages and says: “That case, when examined, furnishes no suffimachinery are free from those defects which neither cient authority for the extensive liability which the skill, care nor foresight can detect.
plaintiff seeks to impose upon the defendant. There This decision is commended alike by sound sense the plaintiff was injured by an accident caused by the and an almost unbroken current of authorities. Car. breaking of the axletree of a stage-coach. The defect riers of goods are insurers against all events but the might have been discovered if a certain examination act of God and the king's enemies. The reason of this had taken place; and it was made a question of fact rigid rule is, as Lord HOLT says, in Cogg v. Bernard
at the trial whether it would have been prudent or (1 Sm. Lead. Cas.), that men are obliged, when they in
not to make that examination, trust their goods to carriers, to part with all control over TINDAL, C. J., who tried the cause, is reported to them, and that, if carriers were not insurers, it would have directed the jury to consider whether there had be easy for them to combine with thieves, and that“ in been, on the part of the defendant, that degree of such a clandestine manner as would not be possible to vigilance which was required by his engagement to be discovered.” But with regard to the carriers of carry the plaintiff safely. Now, if the learned Chief passengers, the same rule has not, with one or two Justice had supposed there was an absolute warranty exceptions, to be hereafter noticed, been applied, “and of road-worthiness, this direction could not have been for the obvious reason,” as Judge HUBBARD remarked given, as it would then have been immaterial whether in Ingalls v. Bills (9 Met. 1), “that a great distinction the defendant had used vigilance or not, and the exists between persons and goods — the passengers degree of vigilance would have been an utterly imbeing capable of taking care of themselves, and of material consideration. The jury having found, on exercising that vigilance and foresight in the main- his direction, for the plaintiff, a motion was made, in tenance of their rights, which the owners of goods the absence of TINDAL, C. J., for a new trial. Two cannot do, who have intrusted them to others.” of the learned judges, in refusing the rule (GASELEE
The carrier of passengers undertakes that as far as and BOSANQUET, JJ.), are certainly reported to have human foresight can go he will provide for their safe used expressions which seem to indicate that they conveyance. The ground upon which his liability rests thought the defendant bound to supply a road-worthy is negligence, while the ground of the liability of the vehicle. Park, J., used language which, as reported, carrier of goods is the absolute warranty for safe is ambiguous. But the judgment of ALDERSON, J., is distinctly opposed to the notion of a warranty | not liable for the injury, but the misfortune must be against latent and undiscoverable defects. He says: borne by the sufferer as one of thai class of injuries
A coach proprietor is liable for all defects in his for which the law can afford no redress in the form of vehicle which can be seen at the time of construction, pecuniary recompense." as well as for such as may exist afterwards, and be In Edwards v. Lord (49 Maine, 279), it was held that discovered by investigation. We have referred | if a passenger receive an injury which any reasonable somewhat fully to this case, because it was put for- care or skill could have prevented, the carrier is liable ward as the strongest authority in support of the plain- therefor, In Sales v. Western Stage Company (4 Iowa tiff's claim which can be found in the English courts, 547), the court says: Carriers of passengers, for hire, and because it was relied on by the judges of the Court are bound to exert the utmost skill and prudence in of Appeals, in New York, in a decision which will be conveying their passengers, and are responsible for hereafter referred to. But the case, when examined, the slightest negligence or want of skilfullness either furnishes no sufficient authority for the unlimited in themselves or their servants. In Galena and warranty now contended for. The facts do not raise Chicago R. Co. v. Fay (16 Ill. 558), the court says: the point for decision, and the authority of TINDAL, The care, skill and diligence required of carriers of C. J., and ALDERSON is against the plaintiff.”
passengers are of the highest degree, and must be proOn such unreliable and misapprehended authority portionate to the danger of their particular mode of has our Court of Appeals imported a new and extra- conveyance; but they are not insurers against all ordinary condition into the contract between carrier accidents, and the passengers take all the risks inciand passenger.
dent to the mode of travel. Such, in short, has beer. The Supreme Court of the seventh district, in the the purport of every decision on the subject, in every case of McPadden v. New York Central Railroad Co. State in the Union where the question has arisen. (47 Barb. 247), repeats the rule of the Alden case, but Such was also the doctrine of the courts of this State the principle was not involved, and the remarks of the before the innovations of the Alden case. In Camden learned judge are wholly obiter. That case was for and Amboy Railroad Co. v. Burk (13 Wend. 626); an accident caused by a broken rail. It appeared that Hollister v. Nowlen (19 Wend. 236); Curtis v. Syraan express train had passed over the place where the cuse and Rochester R. R. Co. (20 Barb. 282); Weed v. rail was broken but a short time before the train on Panama R. Co. (5 Duer, 193); Caldwell v. Murphy which the plaintiff was riding, and that there had been (1 Duer, 233), and other cases, the courts have held the no examination of the track between that time and the carriers of passengers responsible only for the exercise time of the accident. The plaintiff, at the trial, asked of human care and foresight. to go to the jury upon the question whether the rail We regard the rule as laid down in the case of was not broken before the train on which the plaintiff Hegeman v. The Western Railroad Co. (13 N. Y. R. was a passenger came up, but his request was refused, 9), sufficiently rigid to afford the necessary protection and a non-suit granted. It was a proper question for
to travelers, and believe that, should the question the jury even within the rule of the Exchequer again come before the Court of Appeals, it will be Chamber. It has never been questioned that carriers
taken as a precedent rather than the Alden decision. were bound to exercise the uttermost care and fore- The case was also for injuries occasioned by the breaksight in preventing accidents; and a neglect to ex- ing of a car axle, caused by a slight crack or flaw. It amine the track, after the passage of a train, may justly
was proved that the axle was made of the best iron, be regarded as a violation of that rule. Indeed, under and by reputable manufacturers, and that the only the rule of the Alden case, the question whether the way of detecting the flaw was by bending the axle, rail was broken previously to, or at the instant of the after its manufacture - a test which, it appeared, was accident, could not properly be submitted to the jury, used by some manufacturers, but which had not been as it was entirely immaterial — the company being applied to the axle in question. It was a defect in absolutely liable for a breakage of its machinery. construction resulting from a want of skill or care on
So far as we have been able to learn, the law, as laid the part of the manufacturers. The court held that down by the Court of Appeals, has never been fol- the railroad company was bound to the exercise of the lowed outside of this State.
utmost skill and foresight, not only in running their In Massachusetts it has long been settled that car
cars, but in their construction; and that it was a quesriers of passengers are not responsible for hidden do- tion for the jury to determine whether there bad been fects which it is not in their power to discover by any negligence either on the part of the company or of the ordinary means. The case of Ingalls v. Bills (9 Met. manufacturers. Only five judges concurred in the 1), was for an injury caused by the breaking of an decision; MARVIN and DENIO, JJ., dissenting, on axle-tree of a coach, in which there was a very small the ground that the company was not liable for the flaw, entirely surrounded by sound iron one-fourth of negligence of the manufacturers. In the case of an inch thick, and which could not be discovered by Sharp v. Grey, before cited, ALDERSON, J., expressed the most careful examination externally. The court views similar to those of the majority of the court in held, after a most elaborate examination of the author
the above case. He says: “A coach proprietor is ities, that the action could not be maintained; and liable for all defects in his vehicle, which can be seen said: “Where accidents arise from a hidden and at the time of construction, as well as for such as may internal defect, which a careful and thorough exami- exist afterwards, and be discovered on investigation.” nation would not disclose, and which could not be From this cursory examination of the authorities it guarded against by the exercise of a sound judgment, would seem, as is the fact, that the case of Alden v. and the most vigilant oversight, then the proprietor is The New York Central Railroad stands alone and un. supported in the broad proposition it attempts to American Law Review, in an article entitled Law in establish. Indeed the learned judge who delivered Romance, in the number for April, 1867. the opinion in that case seems to have been conscious It has long been a favorite project of mine to carry that he was annexing to the contract of the carrier of this research further back and more extensively into passengers what had not hitherto been understood to literature, and to trace how law and lawyers stood in form a part of it, and attempts to palliate it by saying: the estimation of the older and less familiar moralista, " Though this may seem a hard rule, it is probably dramatists, and novelists. The field, I am sure, is a the best that can be laid down, since it is plain and of rich and inviting one, and however incompletely I easy application, and, when once established, is dis- may succeed in developing its interest, I shall be entinct notice to all parties of their duties. And, prac- tirely satisfied if my essay shall operate to induce the tically, it will be likely to work no more burdensome study of our more ancient authors. results to carriers of passengers than to leave them, I shall endeavor at first to preserve something like with an uncertain criterion of responsibility, to the a chronological series, but if in the course of my introuble and expense of strongly litigated contests bo- | vestigations anything new turns up, which ought to fore juries." We had never before supposed that any have been inserted before, I shall not allow any plea of conveniency, or ease of application, was a restriction to the order of time to prevent its insertion sufficient excuse for a departure from, or innovation out of place. Nor shall I permit my predilection for upon the common law, especially so far as to intro- the English tongue to probibit some little rambling duce new and onerous obligations into the contracts into foreign countries and literatures. In short, I proof parties.
pose to be as rambling and desultory as Dr. Foster's We are in favor of holding all carriers of passengers children, under the influence of the paternal rod, when to the exercise of the highest degree of human skill
, they danced care and foresight, but to make them liable for a dis- “Out of England into France; aster arising from a latent defect in the machinery
Out of France into Spain;
Then he made 'em dance back again." which they are obliged to use, which no human skill, care or foresight could either have prevented or In the “Herdsman's Happy Life,” found in Byrd's detected, is neither just nor reasonable, nor requisite Songs (1588), we read: to the safety of the public.
“For lawyers and their pleading
They 'steem it not a straw;
Is of itself a law ;
Where conscience judgeth plainly, LAW AND LAWYERS IN LITERATURE.
They spend no money vainly.' Law and lawyers have always been a prominent
CHAUCER. subject for comment, and not infrequently, of ridicule, in literature. A good deal of this is too familiar to
Before this, Chaucer had described a lawyer as ono justify review. Every school-boy has grown gloomy
of the Canterbury Pilgrims : over Eugene Aram, and cried at the court scenes in “A Sergeant of the Lawe, ware and wise, The Heart of Mid-Lothian. The first law book read That often hadde yben at the paruis,*
Ther was also, fus riche of excellence. by the young man on entering the study of our pro
Discrete he was, and of gret reverence: fession is usually Ten Thousand a Year, by the He semed swiche,t his wordes were so wise, amiable and funny, but rather mean-spirited Mr.
Justice he was ful often in assise, Samuel Warren, who mixes up some bad law with a
By patent, and by pleine commissioun;
For his science, and for his high renoun, good deal of toadyism and servility. We are all quito Of fees and robes had he many on. well acquainted with Mr. Dickens' legal characters –
So grete a pourchasour was nowher non.
All was fee simple in him to effect, Tulkinghorn and Vholes, Sampson Brass and his sister
His pourchasing might not ben in suspect. Sally, Justice Nupkins and his clerk Jinks, Sergeant Nowhere so besy a man as he ther n'as, Buzfuz and promising young Mr. Phunkey, Messrs.
And yet he semed besier than he was.
In termes hadde he cas and domes alle, Doddson & Fogg, the inexorable partner Jorkins,
That fro the time of King Will weren falle, etc., and with the admirable and humane spirit of his Thereto he coude endite, and make a thing, satire on the abuses of the chancery system. If Mr.
Ther coude no wight pinchef at his writing.
And every statute coude he plaine by rote. Dickens had done nothing else in this way except to
He rode but homely in a medlee cote, draw that wonderful scene in Our Mutual Friend, in Girt with a senit** of silk, with barres smale; which Rogue Riderhood makes his “Alfred Davy," Of his array tell I no longer tale." he would have demonstrated at once his acute knowl
* Parvis, church portico. Such. Opinions. Find flaw. edge of human nature and of the workings of legal affairs. I suppose there are certain other weak per- What a vivid description, especially the touch sons beside myself who have been tempted into “ seemed busier than he was." reading certain of Mr. Anthony Trollope's novels, in which legal matters are marvelously but dully dealt with. Those who are favorable to the admission of The learned Selden, in “ Table Talk,” has an interwomen to the bar will find warrant for their opinions esting section on law, in which the most striking in two works of fiction - to mention the sublime and observation is: “Ignorance of the law excuses no the ridiculous in one breath — The Merchant of Venice man; not that all men know the law, but because 'tis and Griffith Gaunt. All these things are familiar, and an excuse every man will plead, and no man can tell have been well commented on by a writer for the how to confute him.”
BEAUMONT AND FLETCHER.
he is permitted to depart, “an advocate new-vamp'd.” The legal profession and Frenchmen were held up After this, La Writ is as meek as Katherine after her to scorn in Beaumont and Fletcher's comedy, entitled taming by Petruchio, and gives Sampson and his cli“ The Little French Lawyer,” in which, strange to
ents as good advice as Katherine her friends. He dissay, the lawyer is by no means the principal person
suades Sampson from revenge, saying: age, and is not closely connected with the plot. The
“I find I am wiser than a justice of peace now:
Give me the wisdom that's beaten into a man! character of La Writ, the lawyer, is ascribed by several
That sticks still by him. editors to Beaumont's pen. La Writ is a fussy, busy, Go, my son Sampson, I have now begot thee, choleric, mean-spirited fellow, who, by an accidental I'll send thee causes; speak to thy lord and live, success in a duel forced on him by a ruffling gallant,
And lay my share by; go, and live in peace;
Put on new suits, and show fit for thy place; is filled with the idea that he is a man of spirit, and That man neglects his living is an ass. courts strife until his affected bravery is cudgeled out Come cheerly, boys, about our business! of him. He makes his first appearance in a sort of
Now welcome tongue again; hang swords!” general answer to a crowd of clients :
In “The Widow," Martino, clerk of Brandino, the "I understand your causes;
justice, gives a warrant to a suitor, with: Yours about corn, yours about pins and glasses - “Nay, look upon’t, and spare not; every one canWill you make me mad? have I not all the parcels ? not get that kind of warrant from me, signior, Do you And his petition, too, about bell-founding? Send in your witnesses What will you have me do? see this prick i’ the bottom? it betokens power and Will you have me break my heart? My brains are speed; it is a privy mark that runs betwixt the con
melted! And tell your master, as I am a gentleman,
stables and my master; those that cannot read, when His cause shall be the first. Commend me to your they see this, know 'tis for lechery or murder; and mistress,
this being away, the warrant comes gelded and insuffiAnd tell her, if there be an extraordinary feather, cient. And tall enough for her - I shall despatch you too,
* Look you, all these are nihils; they I krow your cause, for transporting of farthingales; want the punction.” Trouble me no more. I say again to you,
Much of the “Spanish Curate" seems designed to No more vexation! Bid my wife send me some pud
"crucify the lawyer.” In this admirable comedy, the dings; I have a cause to run through requires puddings;
character of Bartolus, the lawyer and one of the prinPuddings enough. Farewell."
cipal personages, and the standing of lawyers as eviThat it was the fashion in those days for attorneys denced by the luxurious habits of their wives, is strikto carry bags, is evidenced by the fact that in the duelingly and succinctly exbibited in the opening speeches La Writ's life is saved by his bag, which he hangs in
of his handsome spouse, Amaranta: front of him. His antagonist loses his sword, and La “You know your own disease, distrust and jealousy. Writ triumphs--an example of nonsuit applied to the
You are too covetous; duel. He takes this success so kindly that he becomes If that be rank'd a virtue, you have a rich one. intoxicated, sings lewd songs, asks for “a wench or Set me, like other lawyers' wives, off handsomey, two," says he “hates a coward”.
'-a reminder of Fal
Attended as I ought; and, as they have it,
My coach, my people, and my handsome women, staff's "a plague o' all cowards say I.” But while he is
My will in honest things." winning glory in this unaccustomed field, his causes
From another speech of Bartolus, it appears that one go by default, and he flings away his bag, with
of the learned professions brought grist to the law“Avaunt, thou buckram budget of petitions! Thou spital of lame causes !" He challenges the president- yer's mill, which, in modern times, does not except
indirectly : judge for dismissing his causes, and when told that he is no swordsman, says: “Let him learn ; time, that
“ 'Tis some honest client,
Rich and litigious, the curate has brought to me." trains chickens up, will teach him quickly.” The judge, on receiving the challenge from this “
But the curate brings instead a law student in the
wranggling advocate,” this "little figent thing,” this “nota- person of Leandro, a gallant disguised, who is in love
with the beautiful Amaranta; and, as a means to prosble talking knave," pleads his old age as an excuse for not meeting him in person, and deputes his kins
ecute his suit, proposes to become an inmate of Bar
tolus' house and office. It would be pleasing to the man to fight in his place. The kinsman Sampson appears, and the seconds, by preconcert, strip both com
profession to meet a law student of equal ability and batants to the skin for the purpose of discovering any willingness to pay now-a-days, for this one offered concealed armor, and then run away with their cloth- twenty ducats a month for the privilege, besides three ing and their swords. After a noisy combat of words, hundred down, and to “defray his diet.” Of course, in which the shivering La Writ proposes " to fight at
he was accepted. Diego, the sexton, who accompanies buffets," which Sampson scoffs at, — "My lord, mine him, bids him adieu with: uncle's cause depend on boxes !”— the two fall in with “ Take a good heart; and when you are a cunning the judge and his friends, and La Writ is beaten by
I'll sell my bells, and you shall prove it lawful.” one of the latter, who says:
Amaranta's suspicions are aroused by the liberal “ Nay, never look; your lawyer's pate is broken. And your litigious blood about your ears, sirrah.
payments which her husband tells her the student has Why do you tight and snarl ?
made, and the student serenades her in some verses, La Writ. I was possessed.
which she says “are no law; they sound too sweetly." Champernel. I'll dispossess you. (Beats him.)”
Don Henrique employs Bartolus in a dishonest cause, After promising to “fall close to his trade again, and upon which hinges the other branch of the plot. Barleave brawling,” and asking the judge's forgiveness, | tolus scruples not; “we surgeons of the law do
desperate cures; good fees beget good causes; the suitors to the widow lady," deals out hard meas. prerogative of the crowns will carry the matter; the ure to our profession, in respect to our gallantry toassistant sits to-morrow, and he's your friend; your ward the fair sex : moneyed men love naturally, and as your loves are “ Podrano. Why, these are rascals. clear, so are your causes. Hang the penurious ! Tony. They were meant to be so: their causes, like their purses, have poor issues.” But Does thy master deserve better kindred?
Pod. There's an old lawyer, he “must have witnesses enough and ready—substan- Trimm'd up like a galley-foist; what would he do tial, fearless souls—that will swear suddenly—that will with her? swear anything; for variety, they may swear truth,
Tony. As usurers do with their gold; he woul I look
on her, else 'tis not much look'd after.” He then advises his
And read her over once a day, like a hard report, client to "see” the judge, and dismisses him with Feed his dull eye, and keep his fingers itching; "go, and believe i’ the law.” Before they come into
For anything else she may appeal to a parliament;
Subpoenas and posteas have spoil'd his codpiece," court, the defendant assails Bartolus with foul language, and insinuates that he “would plead a needy
When the suitors present themselves and urge their client's cause for a stary'd hen, or half a little loin of
claims, the lawyer says: “I am a lawyer; I can veal, though fly-blown." Bartolus' opening speech
make her a jointure of any man's land in Naples; and in court is quite in the modern vein:
she shall keep it, too; I have a trick for it.” To which
Tony answers: “If I stood here To plead in the defence of an ill man,
“ Canst thou make her a jointure of thine honesty, Most equal judge, or to accuse the innocent,
Or thy ability, thou lewd abridgement? (To both which I profess myself a stranger),
Those are nonsuited and flung o'er the bar." It would be requisite I should deck my language
When, to test their sincerity, it is inquired of the With tropes and figures, and all flourishes That grace a rhetorician; 'tis confess'd
suitors which of them will“ dare take her for one Adulterate metals need the goldsmith's art
month, and then die ?” the lawyer excuses himself, To set 'em off; what in itself is perfect
because Contemns a borrowed gloss."
“ This is like to be a year of great dissention As a matter of course, the court is with Bartolus and Among good people, and I dare not lose it; his client. On another occasion Bartolus says:
There will be money got."
[To be continued.) “I have been atoning two most wrangling neighbors;
They had no money, therefore I made even.”
THE MORAL STANDING OF THE LEGAL Amaranta, his friends, the curate and the sexton,
PROFESSION. enter into a plot to entice Bartolus from home. Diego A recent writer in the New York Independent feigns mortal sickness, and sends Lopez for Bartolus inakes a violent onslaught on lawyers. “What proto draw his will. Then ensues a most amusing scene. fession,” he asks,“ has sent so many representatives It is represented to Bartolus that Diego is very rich, to corrupt legislation, and to disgrace human nature and, after making sundry bequests, intends most of by the successful glorification of crime? What prohis estate for the covetous lawyer. Diego's attendants fession has given so few saints, so few martyrs, so few give him drink to sustain his strength, and he, becom- moral heroes to the world?” To which we answer, ing tipsy, makes the most extravagant and absurd that to lawyers is due a state of social affairs in which provisions for all sorts of strange objects, and the law- there is no longer any possibility of martyrdom or yer is in an agony at seeing his prospects dissipated. necessity for moral heroism. It is highly probable After spinning out this will as long as possible, the that if it were not for the profession he reviles, this conspirators confess that they have been fooling Bar- writer would never have had a chance to publish his tolus. He raves, and Diego “finds this cataplasm of foolish article, for these are the days of unlicensed a well-cozened lawyer, laid to his stomach, lenifies his printing. Nearly every trace of social and religious fever.” In the meantime, the handsome wife and the liberty on earth is due to lawyers. No class has been law student are improving the opportunity at home, so fruitful of "saints, martyrs, and moral heroes” as and in a pretended attendance at church. On Barto- the clergy, and yet what a world this would be if ruled lus' return he rages horribly, but is quieted by Lopez's by priests! A priest-governed people is synonymous mention of the inquisition as a terror to those who with an ignorant, degraded, superstitious, and unaspirdeny their wives the privilege of church. He pre- | ing people. The priests have always been the cause tends to be reconciled, and invites the conspirators to of all “martyrdom,” and “moral heroism ” was an breakfast. They attend, he deprives them of their outgrowth. The physical safety of society, the liberty weapons, surrounds them with officers, and instead of of religious opinion, the cohesion of our moral sysedibles, puts in one dish “an execution for a thousand tem, are all in great measure due to, and dependent ducats” against the guest; in another, "a capias from on, law and its officers. If it were not for ameliorahis surgeon and his silk man;" in another, “a strong tions which lawyers have effected, some Cotton Mather citation;" and in another, “a warrant to appear before would still be hanging witches; some Calvin would the judges." Out of this mess they are rescued by a still be burning Servetus; slavery would overspread deus ex machina, and in the end all parties are recon- the world; lazy monks would still be scaring rich ciled.
and moribund sinners into large gifts to fatten preIn “A Wife for a Month” a “Lawyer, Physician, tended religious uses. In his recent great work on Captain, and Cutpurse pass over the stage," and Tony,“ European Morals,” Mr. Lecky says that no other a fool, in his remarks to Podrano concerning the vari- agent is so potently beneficial in moulding publio