Fifty years in Wall Street

by Henry Clews

The new case was called after the customary delays, and the same ground was duly traversed again, with my additional witnesses, before another highly intelligent jury, whose prejudices were all on the side of the greatly injured young man, who sought twelve months’ pay for two months’ useless services. The only witness that appeared again for the defendant was his faithful and veracious father, whose memory was marvellously correct in relation to his former statements on the first trial.

There is an old proverb which says that it requires such men to have good memories. I need not quote it, as almost everyone knows it.

To make a long story short, however, that forensic orator appeared again for his poverty-stricken client, armed with all the old enthusiasm exhibited on the former trial. He had not much new matter to present, but his dramatic attributes, by dint of longer practice, and more familiarity with his side of the case (it was only necessary for him to study the one side) had become considerably improved since his former effort, and it is needless to say that he carried the jury with him.

By that intelligent safeguard of our liberties, the jury, the second trial was only regarded as an aggravated case of persecution, on my part, and the verdict was given more cheerfully in favor of the plaintiff than on the former occasion.

Although it would have been much better for me, from a financial point of view, to have paid the amount of the exaction, with all the legal and illegal fees and impositions connected therewith, yet I felt disinclined to be bamboozled in that way.

When the court was applied to for another new trial, the judge said, “I have already given you one new trial, taking the responsibility. The relief you now ask has already been before two juries, and I am not willing to take upon me any additional responsibility in the matter. You must therefore look for any further rights or redress to which you may consider yourself entitled, to the Court of Appeals.”

The case is now, therefore, awaiting the good time and discretion of the Court of Appeals, where it will, in all probability, be heard and adjudicated upon sometime within the next ten years. In the meantime the young man is happy in the reflection that his judgment is a good investment, drawing six per cent. interest.

There is still another case illustrative of some of the peculiar points referred to, and showing the truth of the maxim among lawyers that, “You never know what a jury will do,” in which I had the honor, or the misfortune to be joined.

A well-known outside broker in Wall Street, who had a large experience in transacting business for Mr. Sage and other notabilities of the street, in “puts,” “calls,” and other exterior securities, came to me one afternoon and asked me if I didn’t want to buy a pair of diamond earrings.

At that time I had not begun my career as a dealer in diamonds, except in one solitary instance, and that was when I purchased the wedding ring, which is one of the requisites in a matrimonial contract for a long term. I was, therefore, comparatively a tyro in the business, and the party with whom I was dealing did not fail to take advantage of my inexperience. I made some inquiry about the diamonds from this broker, to which I received apparently satisfactory answers, and I concluded they would suit my wife, and as I had had a good day’s business I made him an offer of a thousand dollars for the precious ornaments, which he quickly accepted, and I paid him the money.