Ans. An unknown quality defined occasionally by the Press and the Public.
Ques. Is the definition invariably the same?
Ans. No, for it depends upon the exigencies of the Press and the frivolity and fickleness of the Public.
Ques. Were you to refrain from questioning a Witness anent his antecedents, and subsequently those antecedents becoming known, his evidence were to lose the credence of the papers, what would be said of you?
Ans. That I had neglected my duty.
Ques. Were you to question a Witness on his past, and, by an interruption of the trial, that Witness's evidence were consequently to become superfluous, what would then be said of you?
Ans. That I had exceeded my duty.
Ques. Is it an easy matter to reconcile the interests of your clients with the requirements of Public Opinion.
Ans. It is a most difficult arrangement, the more especially as Public Opinion is usually composed of the joint ideas of hundreds of people who know as much about law as does a bed-post.
Ques. In the eyes of Public Opinion, whose commendation is the most questionable?