IN CASES OF APPEAL. 123 apprehension in placing on record before the world. An effort was made by the appellant in this suit, who had already expended large sums of money in its prosecution, to induce "his honour" to revise and alter this proceeding, and afford him some reasonable chance, at least, of maintaining his rights. But the tenacity with which men cling to error, the perversity with which they adhere to wrong once perpetrated, was not to be overcome in the instance of this public functionary; and the further prosecution of this suit was consequently abandoned." The appeal from the decision of the * It may be necessary to explain to our legal readers, as to others, the difference between the practice, and law of England, and of America, in matters of this kind. We believe it to be the case, according to the usage of the British law courts, that when a plaintiff or a defendant in a suit already tried, intends to appeal from the decision or verdict had against him, an application is generally made within the four first days of the next ensuing term to the judges of the court in which such suit was originally instituted, for a "rule nisi," praying liberty to set aside such verdict by entering up a nonsuit or verdict instead, for the party so appealing; or to grant a new trial founded on exceptions, or points of law raised on the trial, or on certain alleged facts set forth in an affidavit already on file: these facts generally, being some newly discovered evidence-or, of being taken by surprise; or what is sometimes the case, the misdirection in the charge of the learned judge to the jury, under which their verdict was rendered. A day is thereupon appointed, or comes on in course for the hearing; when the points raised, on which the rule is endeavoured to be made absolute, are fully argued before the court; and are overruled or admitted, as the case may justify: all action, or proceedings on the original verdict being stayed in the mean time. But in the American law courts, the prac Honourable Judge Edwards was in like manner given up, the learned judge in the full plenitude of tice in such cases is very dissimilar. The attorneys of both parties, plaintiff and defendant, are there supposed to take a full and accurate report of the proceedings as they actually occurred on the trial, including the judge's charge, &c. Should either intend moving to set aside the verdict delivered by the jury, notice thereof is given within a certain prescribed time by the party so appealing, to the opposing attorney, and a copy of the report of the trial so taken, transmitted therewith, for his assent or correction, should it vary from the report that he has himself made out. This is called 66 a Case," which is thus returned to the appellant's attorney, with any alterations or amendments there may be; and thereupon submitted to the judge who may have tried the cause, to correct or reconcile the discrepancies in the report, should any exist between the said parties after which the question of setting aside the verdict comes up for argument before the court. In the cause referred to, which was tried before the Honourable Judge Betts of the Supreme Court of the United States, the ground of appeal on which it was thought to supersede the verdict, was the extraordinary, perverse and wrongful interpretation of facts, and the plainest law, by the learned judge in charging the jury (to which exceptions had been taken on the part of the plaintiff on its delivery) by which they were coerced in their decision, and the plaintiff thus deprived of any reasonable equivalent for the loss he had sustained. Yet, whatever this charge may have been, whether delivered under the influence of corrupt or unworthy motives-whether or not the doctrine laid down by the court was, or was not, the law of the land-whether contrary to every former precedent, and opposed to every established principle of American jurisprudence-the public, but more especially the plaintiff or injured party in the suit, became invested with an absolute property in its existence, and had a right to claim any advantage from its correct and faithful report being included in his IN CASES OF APPEAL. 125 an arbitrary and unconstitutional discretion, and in perfect understanding with the plaintiff's attorney, who was of those entitled to his private and friendly interview, refusing to stay proceedings in the cause, until an application could be made, and argument had in legal course at the next sitting of the court, on the reserved points made by counsel at the trial; and by which means the plaintiff, favoured by a most iniquitous verdict, was enabled to enter up judgment, issue execution, and satisfy his demand before that a time even could arrive to the defendant to bring his case on appeal, before any competent legal tribunal for further hearing and adjudication. Case, in his further efforts to set aside the verdict on the grounds we have stated. The suppression of this charge and substitution of another instead, declaring a very opposite version of the same law, by Judge Betts (when the case subsequently came before him for revision previous to its being argued) which this learned functionary never uttered, and perhaps never thought of on the trial, was a grievous wrong—a severe and deliberate injustice done to the plaintiff or appealing party-an outrage upon decency, and as it must appear to be, an outrage of no ordinary kind, against the due and impartial administration of justice- even in America. We have dwelt upon this subject from its extreme importance in faithfully characterising the law of this country-the door which is thus open to the most iniquitous wrong, with the evil which it inflicts upon society in America; where it virtually abrogates the trial by jury in all cases of civil controversy, and leaves every suitor at the mercy and disposition of every venal and corrupt judge, before whom any cause may be called up for trial and adjudication. But such is American law. Such indeed a fair sample of American justice in its every day practice; so little calculated to secure our respect or ensure the least measure of our confidence. When such things can come to pass, and find a response in nearly every state of the republic, are we to feel surprised at the distrust, the little reliance that is placed, even by Americans, in the honesty and uprightness of their rulers, in the efficiency of their legal institutions, or the integrity and good faith of those entrusted with the protection of their character, life, and property; that exhausting human patience, seeks a requital in the wild and fierce revenge, of which in America, we have had so many and fearful examples. The Lynch law code, the reenactments of the unrestrained violence of savage life, is partly of its generating; and which is even attempted to be sustained in it principles, by the asserted necessity of its influence, in checking the growing licentiousness of the people, who are otherwise uncontrolled by the equitable administration of any milder law, in which reliance can be placed for the protection of the innocent, or punishment of the guilty. Some estimate may be formed of the little interest that Americans attach to the proceedings in their law courts, and the little time they bestow in the consideration of all such matters, from the fact, that these courts are often held with an auditory of some two or three attorneys or lawyers, and of scarcely half a dozen other persons, the parties perhaps immediately concerned, as listeners to the AMERICAN APATHY. 127 proceedings. It is not unfrequently that we have gone into the United States District court of the south district of New York, and besides the presiding judge, finding only his register or clerk, two or three lawyers, one representing the plaintiff, the other the defendant, and engaged in the midst of a legal argument of some importance to the luckless suitors, besides whom, the crier, and door-keeper, there was scarcely another present. We could no longer feel surprise, at the conduct we have already noticed in the presiding functionary of this court; in part attributing to this general exemption of all law proceedings from public observation or notice, with the near certainty, that whatever might transpire within these courts, the report would seldom travel beyond their precincts, the lax and very culpable conduct with which we have already charged these institutions. We have endeavoured to impress upon the emigrant who may have the misfortune to be involved in legal warfare in America, the expediency, we might have added the necessity, with a view to an impartial adjudication, or of the ultimate success of his suit, of employing only such counsel or conducting agent in any such he may undertake, as may at least be on some friendly or amicable footing with the presiding judge. We have known in stances where undue means have been resorted to from the facility of access to the judge's private study, or his personal dislike to the opposing party, and where the litigant, contrary to every just expec |