Second Judge: “It is extortion, and done for the purpose of extortion; and I should say he could be indicted for obtaining money by false pretences.”
“I am not sure he could not, my lord,” said the counsel; “but he can’t recover the money back.”
“Then,” said the Judge, “if he obtains money by an indictable fraud cannot he get it back?”
“Well,” said Bumpkin, “that be rum law; if it had bin my bull, he’d a gin ’em summat afore they runned him in.”
It was interesting to see how the judges struggled against this ridiculous law; and it was manifest even to the unlettered Bumpkin, that a good deal of old law is very much like old clothes, the worse for wear, and
totally inapplicable to the present day. A struggle against old authorities is often a struggle of Judges to free themselves from the fetters of antiquated dicta and decisions no longer appropriate to or necessary for the modern requirements of civilisation.
In this case precedents running over one hundred and eight years were quoted, and so far from impressing the Court with respect, they simply evoked a smile of contempt.
The learned Judges, after patiently listening to the arguments, decided that extortion and fraud give no title, and thus were the mists and vapours that arose from the accumulated mudbanks of centuries dispelled by the clear shining of common sense. In spite of arguments by the hour, and the pettifogging of one hundred and eight years, justice prevailed, and the amazed appellant was far more damaged by his legal proceedings than he was by the bull. The moral surely is, that however wise ancient judges were in their day, their wisdom ought not to be allowed to work injustice. He may be a wise Judge who makes a precedent, but he is often a much wiser who sweeps it away.
CHAPTER XII.
How the great Don O’Rapley became an usher of the Court of Queen’s Bench and explained the ingenious invention of the round square—how Mr. Bumpkin took the water and studied character from a penny steamboat.