Temple University School of Law - Restatement Yearbook (Philadelphia, PA)

Page 106 text:

perhaps the defendants should he placed in statu quo. As Keeper of the King’s Conscience, however, on reconsideration lie declared that since this was not a case of where “confidence was reposed and betrayed” nor even where “influence was acquired and abused” he would overlook this technical defect. WILLIAM ALEXANDER HAMILTON, Esq., noted orator, also called by the Commonwealth, said that lie had lectured to a group of fascinated citizens on the subject of No-go-tiable Instruments. Frequently, he testified, upon turning every hundredth page of his lecture notes, he would observe that his a listeners were in a lethargy, apparently spellbound vi 39 by the magic of his eloquence, Under cross exam- ination, he admitted they might have been merely asleep. JAMES R. WILSON, Esq., with one foot in the seat of the witness chair and himself precariously draped over the back thereof, asseverated that he had traced, for the benefit of the accused, the origin of the law of Real Property, commencing with the celebrated case of Flinthead vs. Swollen-Jaw, 49,386 R. C. 13, and continuing through the citation of 10,000 other equally famous cases, citation of which he made without assistance from his notes (which contained approximately 33,182 more). In dwelling on the above case, Mr. Wilson delineated the facts as follows: It appears that Archie Flinthead was the devisee of his grandfather’s uncle by marriage within the prohibited degrees of cosanguinity of a certain close designated as “all that certain lot or piece of ground situate and known as Ups-and-Downs, together with all improvements thereon erected and all lands, tenements and hereditaments appurtenant thereto and subject to all easements, franchises, and encumbrances of record.” Mr. Flinthead, accompanied by his wives and family, of which a recent census had not been taken, repaired to said lot or piece of ground and rang a cow hell at sunset thrice, so as properly to acquire the seisin thereof. Imagine his surprise, then, when a herd of dinosaurs and flock of pterdactvls, attracted by the musical tones of the bell, came gamboling toward him over the greens! Upon investigation, he discovered that these kind creatures were the property of one Hezekiah Swollen-Jaw, who claimed title to the land by mesne assignments of a lease ante-dating a certain Sheriff’s Sale at which Archie’s dearlv-beloved but now departed relative had acquired said land. On appeal, the Court of Last Resorts ruled that, under the Act of Assembly of February 31, 1901, for such case made and provided, where a judgment was subsequent to a ground rent and preceded by an unrecorded mortgage, the Statute of Quia Emptores applied unless the Statute of DeDonis Conditionalibus interfered with the Acts of Mortmain and Praemunire, in which case an Estate Tail After Possi-

Page 105 text:

Mis Honor, JUDGE CHARLES E. BARTLETT, Judge of the Court of Common Pleas No. 1, Philadelphia County (which is in Pennsylvania), cheerfully testified against the defendants, lie stated that the alleged students had once been the victims of his Tort-iire. Additionally he testified that while it was incumbent upon him in his role of their mentor to inculcate in them a comprehensive knowledge of the essentials of negligence, he had found little opportunity in this particular for the exercise of his pedagogic talents, inasmuch as they apparently had a natural aptitude for negligent practices. His Honor also said that lie had permitted them to imbibe freely of the law of deceit, but feared that they had learned this subject too well and later evidenced their thorough knowledge by deceiving him of their complete mastery of the entire law of Torts. The Commonwealth, bv the same witness, not only brought out the fact of the scienter of the accused, but also of their gross familiarity with libels, slanders, malicious prosecutions, probable causes and possible effects, assaults and batteries and malicious interferences of various natures. At this point it was noted on the record by agreement of counsel that very late in the scholastic year the “Iz” Durhams and Mathew Quays of the class, aided and abetted by their henchmen and phantoms, felt a crying need for leaders. As a result of these patriotic desires, the notorious “weight” of authority, 11. “DEAN” GOTTLIEB, was elected president by the modest plurality of 2511 votes, 252 of which were folded but not creased. Because of this slight technicality (or “irregularity”) the registration commission ordered them thrown out, but inasmuch as the winning candidate was seated upon the ballot box, no one with sufficient strength to remove him could be found, and so he was declared duly elected. Other officers were elected at the same time (and under the same circumstances), but as their activities were so great and their fame so far-flung mere mention of their names without further comment would he desecration of memory of their invaluable services. Therefore we content ourselves with saying that “SAM” WORTH, the Orthophonic Mayor of Riverside, was Vice-President, HENRIETTA MOSS was secretary, and JOHN CONNOLLY was treasurer (no accounting of funds ever being made). S. STANGER ISZARD, Esq., was recalled to the stand and stated that he had “professed” in Equity (which is a very “pacific” subject), and also taught the defendants’ Hygienics, insisting that all come into Equity with clean hands. In order to be perfectly equitable, lie raised the technical objection that he was not properly qualified to pass on the guilt of the defendant’s Attempt To Study Law, inasmuch as the subject on which he was prepared to testify was that of Equity and 115

Page 107 text:

bility of Issue Extinct was created. All of which, Mr. Wilson explained, was clear, simple anti self-explanatory. The Commonwealth insured the success of its case by calling the illustrious insurance expert, MALCOLM ADAM, Esq., our Mutual friend for Life. Objection by counsel for the defense was made to the competency of MR. ADAM as a witness on the ground that he would surely incriminate, if he had the chance, his brother, HERBERT ADAM, one of the defendants. MR. ADAM was permitted to testify, however, and he remarked that while great interest in his course was evidenced by the defendants, it was not an insurable interest. MAJOR SCHOFIELD then gingerly stepped to the stand. We might here parenthetically note that the Major at or about this time entered on the uncharted sea of matrimony. As a beacon light to future happiness, MAJOR SCHOFIELD was presented by his well wishing class, with a pair of silver candle-sticks. The witness declared that the demeanor of the defendants in his class was a crime and they had gotten away with murder. MAJOR SCHOFIELD said that his examination questions were never involved and gave an example of their simplicity by the following: Ralph McSneer was running down a quiet street at midnight with a package under his arm. Andrew Gump was lying in wait with wilful, malicious, premeditated and deliberate intent and with a frowardness of heart, devoid of social duty, to shoot, maim and kill, and otherwise slay, one Barney Google, whom he expected to ride down the street on “Spark Plug.” Mistaking McSneer for Spark Plug, Gump fired at the package and struck powerful Katrinka, a young damsel at that moment hanging out of the window drying her hair. In falling, she landed on Mr. Jiggs, with his shoes in his hand, thereby knocking the shoes from his hand. The shoes struck Dintv Moore, who was there and then attempting to break into and enter a home nearby. Dick Dare, who had just turned the corner, sauntered into the arms of a waiting policeman. (This did not occur in Philadelphia.) Of what crime or crimes may Dick Dare be charged, and if so, why not, and if not, why so? 'fhe case of the defendants was seriously compromised by elections held bv them during the second year of the alleged attempt, and we shall not fail to take this into consideration, 'flu officers elected were as follows: HERBERT ADAM. President; and GLADYS HOBART, Vice-President. The defendant, HERBERT ADAM, it may be noted, not only permitted himself to be elected president for the second year, but, we may as well admit, dispelled all hope of ultimate success in this trial by winning the Second Year Prize for proficiency in his studies. For him now to attempt to disprove the charges of Attempt To Study Law is to take up a colossal task. 07