THE ANATOMY OF AX OLD ANECDOTE. 377 



all the acts and words required by law with the most rigorous accu- 

 racy, he, in his turn, besides failing in his object, incurred a variety of 

 penalties which could be just as harshly exacted as his own original 

 demand." 



In like manner, and in deference to the same conservative pro- 

 pensities heretofore noted, an irrational rule of procedure was often 

 adopted in order to preclude the exercise of unconscionable privileges 

 by a defendant. Such, for example, was the origin of that disgrace- 

 ful rule of English law which so long denied to persons accused of 

 felony or treason the benefit of legal aid in making their defense. The 

 English law of crimes and criminal procedure became at a very early 

 stage in its history so excessively technical as to render it intolerably 

 difficult to secure conviction in the face of a skillful defense. In ob- 

 viation of this difficulty, the rule now is, that the proceeding shall be 

 vitiated only by such inaccuracies as are substantially prejudicial to 

 the accused. But the conservative tendency was formerly too strong 

 to admit of this curtailment of the defendant's rights. 



He must not be denied the right to immemorial objections, however 

 irrational. But he could be hampered in the exercise of the right, 

 and, as the most effective expedient for that purpose, he was "denied 

 the legal aid through which alone he could ascertain what his rights 

 might be ; and such was unquestionably the origin of the rule for- 

 bidding defense by attorney. 



It is now reasonable to assume that the story of the bond was 

 the product of the crude legal notions with which we have found 

 it to be so replete. It is not within the scope of our inquiry to 

 exhibit the bearings which this view of the story's origin may have 

 upon its Shakespearean interpretation ; but, that it casts strong light 

 upon the latter subject, we have now occasion incidentally to point 

 out. 



The most noteworthy circumstance in the modern history of the 

 story is its transformation into a comedy ; no flavor of humor being 

 discoverable in what w T ere probably its earliest forms. It had already 

 undergone this metamorphosis when it came to Shakespeare's hands. 

 Italian predecessors of our poet, in adapting the story to their own 

 civilization, recognized the absurdity of ascribing its obsolete legal 

 notions to their own courts. To avoid so glaring an anachronism, 

 they substituted, for the legitimate tribunal of the old story, an irre- 

 sponsible mock court or make-believe judge by whom, without impro- 

 priety, the law of the story could be enunciated as a solemnly dis- 

 guised jest. Henceforth the subject belonged of right to the come- 

 dians. Of all the legal conceptions embodied in the story, scarcely 

 one could have emanated from a Venetian court ; nor, indeed, when 

 properly understood, do they purport so to do : they all without ex- 

 ception being transparently exhibited not as good law, but as the 

 curious conceits of a playful and ingenious woman. 



