LEGAL PUNNING.
Tkeo. Cooper made his maiden attempt at punning in Court the other day, but the effect was not happy. He was engaged in the case cf Wright versus Quick, wherein the plaintiff sought to recover a £50 deposit which the defeidant had forfeited for non-performance of S&tract, and in examining the plaintiff he ssied Mm if it was Ms opinion that the defendant "was not right in forfeiting the deposit so quick" % words played upon were emphasised so as to Smw attention to the joke, and then, as the CgUrt made no sign of recognition the question Repeated with added emphasis, and there was m. a chorus of indignant remonstrances at the S&asfcliness of the attempt that the abashed Cooper at once collapsed. These legal witticisms le now becoming so frequent that Mr Macdonald nasfc be held accountable for encouraging them fy Ms example. Tyler has become quite mcorCgible in Ms punning and the youngsters are "pidly following in his wake.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TO18821202.2.7
Bibliographic details
Observer, Volume 5, Issue 116, 2 December 1882, Page 179
Word Count
163LEGAL PUNNING. Observer, Volume 5, Issue 116, 2 December 1882, Page 179
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in