SIR E. CLARKE AND THE BAR—AN EXPLANATION.
Sir,—The paper you edit with so much advantage to the public is the recognised organ of the legal profession. This being so, I appeal to you on behalf of the Bar. Sir, it will not have escaped your attention that on a recent occasion Sir Edward Clarke, in returning thanks for his colleagues of the Law List, referred to the custom observed by some counsel of accepting briefs indiscriminately. The ex-Solicitor-General (shortly, I trust, to become "Mr. Attorney",) related an anecdote concerning the last of the Barons—Mr. Baron Huddlestone—to the following effect. You will remember that Sir Edward, when only a stuff-gownsman, was "with" the eminent Bencher of Gray's Inn in a case. "I trust, Mr. Clarke," said the coming Baron's assistant to the then promising Junior, "that you will be able to attend to it if Mr. Huddlestone fails to put in an appearance." "I suppose," replied the future Sir Edward, "that Mr. Huddlestone is not coming." "Well, he may be away," was the reply, "because to-day he has briefs in thirteen other actions." Then Sir Edward wittily explained that the fault lay with the public. Suitors could select their own advocates, and there were plenty of men practising at the Bar who would gladly accept a brief, for a very moderate fee, should the services of a better-known colleague be retained in some other matter. Mr. ex-Solicitor is perfectly right. There are such men. For instance, I myself, should Sir Edward wish it, would willingly assist him. If he has an overflow of pink-tape tied parcels, let him send them to me, and I will give them my best attention. I shall be delighted to pick up, so to speak, the documentary crumbs that fall from his brief-encumbered table. But that is a matter which chiefly concerns Sir Edward and myself. It is not entirely with a view to making the above suggestion that I address you. No, Sir, I have other than personal interests at heart.
I am convinced that, although every counsel has the right to be "retained" in every case, but a comparative few exercise the privilege. I have known the late Serjeant Parry (with whom I have had the honour to act—while taking a note in the temporary absence of a learned friend—on more than one occasion) return his brief, with its accompanying honorarium, when unable to attend to the former, and thus earn the latter. Speaking for myself, I made it a rule, shortly after I was called, never to "devil" in two places at once. But to come to the point. As a matter of fact—and a grain of true testimony is better than a ton of theory—I can deliberately declare that, during a long forensic experience, extending over several decades, I have never had two cases on the same day. And what has been my experience no doubt has been the experience of many others. I would not for worlds have it thought that I neglect my duty because I have a plethora of professional work. And here I must stop, as I have to give my most careful attention to a consent brief, which appears to me to bristle with technical difficulties. However, as I am desired to acquiesce, I shall no doubt carry out my client's instructions with the customary formalities.
Pump-handle Court, Oct. 21.
(Signed) A. Briefless, Jun.