154 FACTS RELATING TO GROTON, MASSACHUSETTS. 



discharged, they were all in great glee, for they knew they had not 

 been notified of their enrolment. In their ignorance they had not 

 engaged counsel. 



They had a consultation in whisper, when one of them, who 

 seemed to act as boss or leader, beckoned Mr. Hopkinson and Mr. 

 Dana into another room. " How much will you charge to defend 

 me and the other nine? " "Ten dollars, — one dollar a head. What 

 is your name?" "Hateful W. Parkins."^ "There is an old rule, 

 and it is a good one, * Pay as you go.' Go back, collect your 

 money, and pay the coin down." This was done, and the fee 

 pocketed. 



The Court. "The next case is that of Hateful Parkins." "All 

 ready." "Have you any counsel?" "Yes, Mr. Hopkinson and 

 Mr. Dana, the young lawyers, will defend me and the other nine." 

 The Court. " I will read the complaint ; " which is read. " Hateful 

 Parkins, what say you to this complaint? Do you plead guilty or not 

 guilty?" Whereupon Mr. Hopkinson whispered to Parkins, "They 

 have got your name wrong ; don't answer, keep dumb ! " The Court 

 repeated the question, but Parkins kept dumb. Whereupon the 

 Court, under some excitement, said that he would be obliged to 

 commit the defendant for contempt of court, and continued, " Par- 

 kins, why don't you answer?" Farkins. "My name ain't Hateful 

 Parkins." "What is it?" " Hateful W. Parkins." Whereupon Mr. 

 Hopkinson moved the Court that the complaint be quashed and 

 dismissed, because of misnomer in the complaint. 



Mr. Russell then moved for leave to amend the complaint by 

 simply adding the capital letter "W." after the word "Hateful" 

 wherever it occurs, so that it would read " Hateful W. Parkins " 

 instead of " Hateful Parkins." To this motion Mr. Hopkinson 

 objected that upon every principle of good pleading as stated by the 

 best writers of elementary law, as well in England as in our own 

 country, misnomer in a criminal complaint is not a matter that can 

 be amended. The complainant takes his risk. For aught we know 

 there may be forty Hateful Parkinses, but this defendant is not one 

 of them. The complainant must be sure and get the right " pig by 

 the ear." Unfortunately for him, he has got the wrong one now, and 

 he must take the consequence. Mr. Russell, in reply, insisted that 

 his proposed amendment ought to be allowed ; but the Court said 

 that unless he could produce some authority to the contrary, he 

 would not allow the motion to amend. Mr. Russell admitted that he 



^ This name is fictitious. 



