NOTE 4 B. 



terrupted him, and said, &quot; The goodness of the cause made him eloquent before, 

 and despite made him eloquent again.&quot; 



In the Harleian MSS. in the British Museum, it is stated as follows : 

 Elizabeth, Queen of England, was a princess most entirely beloved of the 

 people, for during her government pure justice and mercy did overflow in all 

 courts of judicature, which made her so famous, that upon any motion abroad 

 from her palace, many thousands would crowd into the streets and highways, 

 to congratulate her with their loyalty, and loud acclamations sent up to heaven 

 for her majesty s long life, health, and prosperity. And in this peerless queen s 

 reign it is reported that there was but one serjeant-at-law at the Common Pleas 

 bar (called Serjeant Benlowes) who was ordered to plead both for the plaintiff 

 and defendant, for which he was to take of each party ten groats only and no 

 more ; and to manifest his impartial dealing to both parties, he was therefore to 

 wear a party-coloured gown, and to have a black cap on his head of impartial 

 justice, and under it a white linen coif of innocence, but in the reign of King 

 James Serjeants were made in abundance, and a Serjeant s place sold for 800/. j 

 and in the late King Charles the First s reign, the preferment to be a Serjeant 

 grew to a higher rate, for it was then raised to 1500/. and thirteen made at one 

 time, so strangely differing are the proceedings in law in these latter times to the 

 former, that requires the use of many lawyers, and they to have unreasonable 

 fees. 



And I understand that, within the last twenty years, when there was but one 

 barrister at the Ely Sessions (Mr. Hart), he used to argue on both sides. 



This practice seems to have existed in all civilized countries, and countries 

 approaching to civilization. In some travels in Africa, (Park s, if I mistake 

 not) the author says, that the litigation is conducted, not by the parties them 

 selves, but by persons called &quot; palavers.&quot; Milton, in his history of Muscovy, 

 two hundred years ago, vol. iv. 278, says, &quot; They have no lawyers, but every 

 man pleads his own cause, or else by bill or answer in writing delivers it with 

 his own hands to the duke ; yet justice, by corruption of inferior officers, is 

 much perverted. Where other proof is wanting, they may try the matter by 

 personal combat or by champion. If a debtor be poor, he becomes bondman 

 to the duke, who lets out his labour till it pay the debt ; till then he remains in 

 bondage. 



In the Edinburgh Review for February, 1822, upon the question whether a 

 prisoner accused of felony ought to be heard by counsel? the author says, 

 &quot; Whence comes it, that the method of getting at truth, which is so excellent 

 on all common occasions, should be considered as so improper on the greatest 

 of all occasions, where the life of a man is concerned ? If an acre of land is to 

 be lost or won, one man says all that can be said on one side of the question 

 another on the other; and the jury, aided by the impartiality of the judge, 

 decide. The wit of man can devise no better method of disentangling difficulty, 

 exposing falsehood, and detecting truth.&quot; 



&quot; Justice is found, experimentally, to be most effectually promoted by the 

 opposite efforts of practised and ingenious men, presenting to the selection of an 

 impartial judge, the best arguments for the establishment and explanation of 

 truth. It becomes, then, under such an arrangement, the decided duty of an 

 advocate to use all the arguments in his power to defend the cause he has 

 adopted, and to leave the effect of those arguments to the judgment of others.&quot; 

 Sidney Smith. 



Milton seems not to have been partial to the character of a lawyer. In his 

 tract on education, vol. i. 276, he says, &quot; Some, allured to the trade of law, 

 grounding their purposes not on the prudent and heavenly contemplation of 

 justice and equity, which was never taught them, but on the promising and 

 pleasing thoughts of litigious terms, fat contentions, and flowing fees.&quot; Vol. ii. 

 56. &quot; It is true an adulteress cannot be shamed enough by any public pro 

 ceeding ; but the woman whose honour is not appeached is less injured by a 

 silent dismission, being otherwise not illiberally dealt with, than to endure a 

 clamouring debate of utterless things, in a business of that civil secresy and 

 difficult discerning, as not to be overmuch questioned by nearest friends ; which 



