LOQUACITY AND THE LAW

NZ Truth, Issue 1185, 16 August 1928, Page 2

LOQUACITY AND THE LAW

(From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Christchurch Representative.)IF you Are eligible to wear the wig and gown of a barrister and desire to irritate the judge, indulge m irrslevancies ad infinitum. Irrelevahcies creep into the best of briefs, but Lawyers L.' M. Inglis and W. H. Walton, of Timaru, succeeded m attracting to themselves judicial wrath when defending two men m a case at Timaru last week. Judge Adams likes counsel to keep to the point— and woe batide those who persistently err after several reminders. - . Lawyer Walton was the first to come under the,. 'judicial hammer. He had been emphasizing some point with which the judge could not agree, and, although his honor made it clear what he thought, Lawyer Walton stiirkept on. . Finally, the judge lost patience. "I will not hear you further; you will accept my ruling," he remonstrated sternly. Later on m the trial, Lawyer Inglis found himself at cross-pur-poses with his honor, who, had repeatedly pulled him up for irrelevancies and pointless interrogation. ' \ "Oh, go on," remarked his honor, wearily. "It takes less time to' waste time tharr.it does to try and put you right." On one occasion, when some point was being labored to extinction, the judge again had a chip at counsel. "Really, you know," he remarked, "the time of the jury is worth something to them." / As it wasi the trial occupied the best part' of three days, but how much time would have been saved if counsel had not given occasion for judicial remonstrance is a moot point. Lopuacity and the law are not always the best of bedfellows.