Page 215 - La Société canadienne d'histoire de l'Église catholique - Rapport 1961

lodging. The Justice was quite willing to do 50-(for you
must know, he was not only a Judge, but a landlord also).
The traveler and plaintiff's agent accordingly had their horses
cared for, had supper, lodging and breakfast, immediately after
which the stranger ordered his horse; but when about to mount
and ride off, he was civilly informed by the late Justice (now
landlord) that "his bill was twelve shillings!'' In this case,
the Justice probably pocketed more than either party or special
constable. The gentleman who related the incident, in telling
it, laughed until he shed tears of merriment.
I happened to be present, at the other trial, I alluded to,
and witnessed the entire scene. It took place in a Justice
court in Iowa county. The court was held in a small log
school-house. The suit was brought to recover the amount of
a note of hand. The defendant plead either payment or want
of consideration-each party had employed counsel, and a jury
of six was empannelled to try the issue. A witness was
called and sworn.' In the course of the examination, one of
the counsel objected to some leading question put by the
opposite side, or to some part of the witness' answer as impro-
per testimony. The Justice overruled the objection, and the
witness proceeded; but ere long another objection similar to
the first was made from the same side. On this second objec-
tion being made, the foreman of the Jury, a large and portly
individual, who bore the title of Colonel, and probably owing
to his exalted military rank, mas permitted to wear his hat
during the trial, manifested a good deal of impatience, shown
by fidgeting in his seat and whispering to his fellow jurors;
but the Justice again overruled the objection and told the
witness to proceed. This he did for a short time, when he
made a statement which was clearly irrelevant and contrary to
every rule of evidence and common sense. The attorney who
had so often and so unsuccessfully attempted to exclude this
sort of evidence, could no longer silently submit-he again
rose from his seat and most respectfully appealed to the court,
protesting against such statements going to the Jury as testi-