TWO WAYS OF EXAMINING A WITNESS.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2242, 5 May 1881, Page 3

TWO WAYS OF EXAMINING A WITNESS.

Wo meet with a good illustration of two methods of examining a witness, and by two eminent counsel, Francis Jeffrey and Henry Cockburn. The examination turned upon the sanity or insanity of one of the parties concerned, and Jeffrey and Oookburn were acting together in the case, Jeffrey bagan—“ls the defender, in your opinion, perfectly sane?’’ he said to one of the witnesses, a plain stupid-looking countryman. The witness gazed in bewilderment at the question, but gave no answer. Jeffrey repeated it, altering the words — “ Do you think the defendant capable of managing his own affairs ?” Still in vain « I ask you," said Jeffrey, “do you consider the man perfectly rational ?” No answer yet; ho glowered with amazement, and scratched his head. “ Let mo tackle him,” said Cockburn. Then assuming his own broadest Scotch tones, and turning to tho obdurate witness, he began: “ Hao ye your mull [snuff-box] wi’ yo ?” “ Ou ay,” said the awkward fellow, stretching out his snuff -horn to Cockburn. “ Noo, hoo lang hue ye kont John Sampson ?” said tho witty advocate, saluting the mull and taking a pinch. “ Ever since he was that height,” was the ready reply, tho witness indicating with his hand tho alleged height. “ An dae yo think noo, atween you and me, said Cockburn in his most insinuating Scottish brogue, “ that there's ony thing intill the creature?” “ I would not lippen (trust) him with a bull calf," was the instant rejoinder. The end was gained amid the convulsions of the court, and Jeffrey said to Oookburn that he had fairly extracted the essence out of the witness. —“ Leisure Hour.”