with great promptness and considerable confusion. The jury returned a verdict, without leav ing the box, of five shillings against the Duke, which sum had already been paid into court by him; and the Judge, Brother D , and I rustled out among the " silks," grateful for the courtesies shown us in a strange land. 1 suggested to the Judge that he open the
October term in a wig and gown, and that he require all lawyers practising in his court to carry the " green bag." To this he only replied, — "The law was sound; Lord Coleridge's judicial manner very fine. The wig and gown and all the rest of it are a lot of flumadiddle." H. D. A. KANSAS Ciiv, Mo.
LONDON LEGAL LETTER. LONDON. Dec. 10, 1892. Д NUMBER of the common law judges have ^* been engaged since term began in trying election petitions throughout the country. There are always a number of these trials alter a general election. At the close of such a national electoral struggle as we had in July, there are generally a large number of constituencies in which heated and disappointed partisans impute corrupt and illegal conduct to their successful rivals. Immense interest was excited by the petition brought against Mr. Balfour, the leader of the Opposition, by his defeated opponent, Professor I. E. C. Munroe; the judges were invited to declare the election null and void on the ground of what I may con veniently call the employment of corrupt influ ences by Mr. Balfour's agents. Professor Munroe is a political economist of some distinction, and enjoys among his friends a reputation for hardhcadcdness, so that a large section of the public were tempted to suppose the professor would not have risked the chance of a defeat on his petition. if he had not some tangible evidence of corruption at his disposal. You can imagine what a nasty flout to the Unionist party it would have been had their darling leader in the House of Commons been unseated by reason of the improprieties of his subordinates. I know that a number of influ ential Gladstonians confidently anticipated the eviction of Mr. Balfour from East Manchester. Bnt this was not to be. Not only did the petitioner's case fail; it failed miserably. Many general accusa tions were unsupported by a title of proof, while the evidence in support of others utterly broke down. All England laughed at Professor Munro's
discomfiture, and it is to be hoped that he finds some consolation in those economic studies in which alone he has hitherto found laurels. The only other case of the kind I need allude to is the South Meath election petition, where the anti-Parnellite member has been unseated on account of illegal influence persistently exerted in his favor during the contest by the Roman Catholic bishop of the diocese and his priests. In giving judgment the judges were careful to abstain from disputing the absolute right of the clergy to exercise moral suasion, but it was clearly proved that the political counsels, tendered to their flocks had gone far beyond this limit. Men were threatened with the refusal of the sacrament, of the last offices of religion, and even of Christian burial if they gave their vote for the Parnellite candidate. Under these circumstances the judges had no hesitation in finding for the petitioner. One of our foremost legal periodicals, the "Law lournal," is changing hands; it has hitherto been characterized by quiet, unostentatious merit, scarcely trespassing into fields other than those purely legal. Under the coming regime I fancy a bolder policy will be pursued. The new pro prietor is Mr. Lewis Edmunds, one of our leading patent lawyers, a man whose name is synonymous with successful energy. He is the author of the standard treatise on the law of patents, and brings to bear on this class of cases an amount of seien tifie and chemical knowledge which you rarely find outside the laboratory of the pure scientist. With us there has been a great development in profes sional journalism of late years. Such periodicals, whether they were religious or legal, used to ex
