of persuasion more powerful with judge and jury than their favorable opinion of the probity and honor of him who pleads a case before them.

12. Hence the lawyer who prizes, as he should, all legitimate means of permanent success in his profession, will always decline, both on moral grounds and from motives of policy, to embark in causes that are odious and manifestly unjust; and, when he supports a doubtful cause, he will lay the chief stress upon such arguments as appear to his own judgment the most tenable, reserving his zeal and his indignation for cases where injustice and iniquity are flagrant.

13. In conclusion we may remark, that the very widest field is open to the honest advocate for the study of human nature', for the analysis of character', for tracing effects to their causes', for aiding the oppressed', and for enforcing the claims of justice,.. Of all the liberal professions, none gives fairer play to genius and abilities than that of the advocate. He is far less exposed than the politician to suffer by the arts of rivalry, or popular prejudice, or secret intrigue. His subjects are always new; he is sure of coming forward according to his merit; he enters the lists boldly with his competitors; and every appearance which he makes is an appeal to the public, whose decision seldom fails of being just, because it is impartial. His success is in his own hands; and he may rest assured that the multitude of clients will never fail to resort to him who gives the most approved specimens of his knowledge, his eloquence, his tact, his industry, and his integrity.

LESSON CXX.

THE ISSUE BETWEEN PARTIES AT LAW, AND THE MANAGEMENT OF A CASE.

1. In all suits at law there must be what is called an issue between the parties, which arises from a charge, accusation, or claim, on the one side, and its denial on the other; and the issue, or point in dispute, is naturally reached as soon as the charge of the plaintiff has been answered by the de

fendant. The burden of proof may rest with either party, according to the nature of the case.

2. Thus, in that celebrated case in which Cicero is supposed to have delivered his beautiful and happily-arranged oration in defense of Milo, who is accused of killing Clodius, the plea of Milo, in answer to the charge, is, I killed him; but the killing was in self-defense, and hence justifiable in the eyes of the law.

3. Here the accused, admitting the deed, declares the killing justifiable, which the other party denies; and this declaration on the one side, and denial on the other, constitute the issue which is to be tried at law; and, in this case, as the burden of proof is thrown upon the defense, it is the business of Cicero to demonstrate the lawfulness of Milo's action.

4. But, besides the main question in dispute, there are often many subordinate ones, which are brought in, on the one side or on the other, to contribute toward its elucidation; and these, also, are often made matters of issue between the parties. Thus Milo says, I killed Clodius because he attempted to assassinate me; and this is met by a denial.

5. Often circumstantial evidence, in the absence of direct testimony, has to be weighed. The witnesses on which parties rely are to be produced; their admissibility is perhaps to be argued before the court; and, after they have been examined and cross-examined, the credibility of their testimony is to be weighed by judge and jury, in the light of the character which the witnesses sustain for truth and veracity, their personal interest in the case, and their friendship or enmity toward the parties. And, finally, in criminal cases, as in that against Milo for the killing of Clodius, the characters of the two principal parties naturally come up for investigation; and we find that Cicero uses all the embellishments of oratory to set forth the virtues of his client on the one hand, and to contrast with them the which stained the character of Clodius.

gross vices

6. It is of the greatest importance to the advocate that, in all his arguments, and episodes, and embellishments, he

a This oration, as we now have it, was written out by Cicero after the trial.

keep clearly in view the main question in dispute, that he may make every thing bear to that end; otherwise he will be very liable to wander from the point, and bewilder both himself and his hearers. And no less important is this clearness of perception and discrimination to judge and jury, who sometimes find it no easy matter, amid the multitude of arguments and agreeable digressions of a skillful advocate, to separate that which is offered in proof from that which is only brought in for illustration.

LESSON CXXI.

THE TRIAL OF ROBERT EMMET.

[In the month of September, 1803, Robert Emmet, then only twenty-three years of age, was brought to trial in the city of Dublin on a charge of high treason, for plotting and instigating a rebellion against the British government. He was found guilty of taking an active part in an attack upon the castle and arsenals of Dublin, and was condemned, and executed for the crime.

We give, first, the closing part of the speech of the Attorney General in the case, which is admirable for the just and noble sentiments which it conveys.]

FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S SPEECH.

1. Gentlemen of the Jury:-If I have said any thing to incite within you an additional indignation against the crime of treason, I am not sorry for having done so; but I do not mean, in expressing my horror of the crime, to prejudice you against the criminal. On the contrary, in proportion to the enormity of the crime, should the presumption be that he has not committed it.

2. I must also request, if you have heard, before this day, any thing unfavorable to the prisoner, that you will endeavor to forget it. Popular rumor should be entirely forgotten; that which may have been matter of idle conversation should not work against the prisoner at the awful moment of trial. In the weighing of evidence, every former feeling of your minds against the prisoner must be forgotten; and you must give him the full benefit of any defense which he may make, and dispassionately consider the nature of his vindication. You have the life of a fellow-subject in your hands, and, by the peculiar benignity of our

laws, he is presumed to be innocent until your verdict shall find him guilty.

3. But, in leaning against a bias, you must not take a direction the other way. You must bear in mind that you have a most solemn duty to discharge to your country and to your God; and if it shall appear that the prisoner was the prime mover of this rebellion-that he was the spring which gave it life and activity, then, I say, as you regard the obligation of the oaths which you have taken, and the solemn responsibilities which they devolve upon you, you must give a truthful verdict. It is not for you to separate punishment from guilt; and you must not allow any false feeling of pity for the man to warp your judgment against the claims of public justice.

LESSON CXXII.

EXTRACT FROM EMMET'S SPEECH.

[After hearing the evidence, which was full and decisive against the prisoner, and listening to the charge of the judge, Lord Norbury, the jury, without leaving their seats, pronounced the prisoner guilty. When asked what he had to say why judgment of death and execution should not be awarded against him according to law, he arose, and, standing forward in the dock in front of the bench, made an impromptu address. Of his speech, which occupies seven octavo pages in the original, only brief extracts can here be given.

It was his country's degradation, and the sufferings of her people from British misrule, that touched the heart of the noble-minded Emmet; and, although the insurrection, which he seems to have planned, was insane in the last degree, yet the eloquence and pathos evinced in his dying speech, and the courage with which he met his fate, have won universal admiration.]

1. My Lords:-What have I to say why sentence of death should not be pronounced on me according to law? I have nothing to say that can alter your predetermination, or that it would become me to say, with any view to the mitigation of that sentence which you are here to pronounce, and which I must abide. But I have much to say which interests me more than that life which you have labored to destroy. I have much to say why my reputation should be rescued from the load of false accusation and calumny which has been heaped upon it.

2. Were I only to suffer death after being adjudged guilty

by your tribunal, I should bow in silence, and meet the fate that awaits me without a murmur. But the sentence of the law, which delivers my body to the executioner, will, through the ministry of that law, labor, in its own vindication, to consign my character to obloquy; for there must be guilt somewhere-whether in the sentence of the court or in the catastrophe, posterity must determine.

3. When my spirit shall be wafted to a more friendly port; when my shade shall have joined the bands of those martyred heroes who have shed their blood on the scaffold and in the field in defense of their country and virtue-this is my hope: I wish that my memory and name may animate those who survive me, while I look down with complacency on the destruction of that perfidious government which upholds its domination by blasphemy of the Most High. (Here he was interrupted and severely rebuked by the judge.)

4. My lord, shall a dying man be denied the legal privilege of exculpating himself, in the eyes of the community, from an undeserved reproach thrown upon him during his trial by charging him with ambition, and with attempting to cast away, for a paltry consideration, the liberties of his country? Why, then, insult me? or, rather, why insult justice, in demanding of me why sentence of death should not be pronounced? (Here he was told to proceed.)

5. I am charged with being an emissary of France'! An emissary of France'! And for what end'? It is alleged that I wished to sell the independence of my country! And for what end? Was this the object of my ambition? and is this the mode by which a tribunal of justice reconciles contradictions? No, I am no emissary. My ambition was to hold a place among the deliverers of my country; not in power nor in profit, but in the glory of the achievement!

6. Sell my country's independence to France! And for what? For a change of masters? No; but for ambition! Oh my country, was it personal ambition that could influence me? Had it been the soul of my actions, could I not, by my education and fortune, by the rank and consideration of my family, have placed myself among the proudest of my