« PreviousContinue »
he been an Englishman, have undoubtedly attained the Bench, if not the highest legal honor our Sovereign can bestow. In France, this career was not open to him, the judges being a profession distinct from the advocates; and it is probable that Berryer made a better French advocate than he would have made an English judge. His most celebrated cases of advocacy were the defences of Ney (in which he was associated with his father), Cambronne, Debelle, and other generals, and of Louis Napoleon and Montalembert; and of civil business, the Verac and Ouvrard cases, and the claim made on the French Government by the United States in 1834.
“ As a politician, he was a consistent Legitimist; he also supported trial by jury, liberty of the press, and the hereditary peerage. He continued his attendance in the Chamber to the very last. His wife died in 1842. He leaves one son."
CONFESSIONS. — Adèle Bernard, without being precisely what the French call an ingénue, is certainly very ingenuous. Accused of concealing the birth of her child, and of throwing the said child to the pigs, she admitted the truth of the charge; and, being convicted, was sentenced to a term of imprisonment. According to one journal a month, according to another. two months, had passed when Adèle's child was born in the jail where she was undergoing her punishment. Some astonishment was caused, an inquiry was instituted, and Adèle Bernard was brought before the Court of Appeal at Nancy; where, on being asked whether she had not given false evidence at her trial, she answered in the affirmative, just as she had answered in the affirmative when she was asked, whether she had not killed her child and thrown it to the pigs. It has been suggested, that Adèle Bernard is one of those young persons who are not in the habit of saying “no” to any one; and, seriously, it appears as though, pressed by the interrogatories of the tribunal, she would have declared herself guilty of no matter what crime, rather than offend her judges by contradicting them. According to one report, “she thought it was forbidden to say no," — an impression which may have been produced by the attitude of the authorities at the elections towards those who venture to oppose the government candidate. The Paris correspondent of the Daily News attributes the suicidal perjury of the young girl to the deliberate advice of her mother; who pointed out to her that, “if she told the truth, she would get off easily.” Only she did not tell the truth. Le Droit blames the medical examiners, who hastened to certify that the accused had given birth to a child, when it is now clear that she could have done nothing of the kind. The juge d'instruction, who went to visit the pigs, and, finding no remains of a child amongst them, seems to have concluded that the voracious animals must have devoured the infant to the last atom, ought also not to be let off without blame. But it was the too great anxiety of her judges to elicit the truth that really forced Adèle Bernard to give false testimony against herself. “Our magistrates," says M. Lockroy, writing about this case in Figaro, “ are always inclined to look upon the accused as guilty. Their sole preoccupation is to obtain an avowal of the crime. And the fear inspired by the judges is such that some persons confess at once, rather than displease them.” That is to say, that in place of the obsolete physical torture, moral torture is employed. “I am sure," continues M. Lockroy, “that a magistrate, if he desired it, might extract the strangest confession from a peasant. If the brother of Adèle Bernard had been accused of giving birth to a child, the young man would have made no difficulty about agreeing with the judges that such was the fact." - Pall Mall Gazette.
ATTORNEYS' Costs IN BANKRUPTCY. An attorney's bill submitted for taxation in the Bristol District Bankruptcy Court, last week, contained the following novel item: “ Attending messenger, who informed me that a cat was locked up on the bankrupt's premises; attending same, and releasing cat, 6s. 8d.” At first, this unique charge was taxed off by the registrar; but, on the explanation that the stock on the premises was a valuable one, and might suffer considerable damage if the cat were allowed to remain in undisputed possession, the item was restored.
A DIFFICULT QUESTION. The Vienna tribunals will require Solomon's sagacity to settle a question that will shortly be brought before them. A few hours before the last drawing of Austrian “ Credit Shares," – a kind of lottery, – two friends meet in the street, and A. asks B. to accompany him for a walk. B. declines, since he has yet to get four “ Credit” tickets, and the drawing will commence in a few hours. A. then begs that he will also get four for him, which B. promises to do. A. duly receives, before the drawing, an envelope containing his tickets, together with the account for four shares, which he at once pays. The envelope is put away, and in the evening the friends again meet, just before the result of the drawing is known. The moment the list appears, each looks at his numbers; and B. finds, to his dismay, that he has only three tickets, having sent to his friend A., by mistake, five instead of four, – the one which has drawn the prize among them. At the same moment the lucky A. also discovers the error, but declines to share his gains with his hasty friend, who will now call the civil powers to his aid. — Pall Mall Gazette.
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1869, by
LITTLE, Brown, & Co., in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts.
PRESS OF JOHN WILSON AND SON.
THE LIMITS OF THE ExcLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF ADMIRALTY
IN THE UNITED States
DECEMBER, 1868, AND JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH,
AND APRIL, 1869
Book Notices .
dence, 747. Parsons on Shipping and Admiralty, 748. Oliver's Manual
List OF LAW BOOKS PUBLISHED
SINCE APRIL 1, 1869.
SUMMARY OF EVENTS
UNITED STATES. — Supreme Court, Texas v. White, 765; other Cases, 775.
Legislation, Circuit Judges, 776. California – U. S. District Court, U.S.