« PreviousContinue »
had. I had charge of the office litigation on the common law side and I was also Mr. Harrison's assistant, being with him always at the trials, whether the brief was from the office or out of it.” For the ability of his senior he had the greatest admiration and took full advantage of his opportunities. To this period of his professional life he probably owes more than to any other. To be four years at “the left arm,” as he styled it, of a man who had no superior as a verdictgetter falls to the lot of few young men.
I cannot resist repeating a story related by Sir Glenholme in the address to which I have already referred, as it well illustrates his accomplishment as a story-teller, and he never hesitated to tell a story, if, as in this case, the joke was upon himself. During the last year of his intimate association with Mr. Harrison (to be accurate, June 7th, 1875), he found himself in a very embarrassing position, one likely to upset any young counsel. He was called upon suddenly one morning to defend a woman charged with a serious crime. He rushed hurriedly over to the old court house on Adelaide Street and took his place within the bar and entered at once upon his task. Seated about the table were Sir Matthew Cameron, Mr. Harrison and Mr. Kenneth McKenzie and other leaders of the bar, enough in itself to disconcert a man of his years. The rest I give in his own words. “I should have said there was a very important domestic event occurring in my house at the time I was defending this lady. I was sending Percy Galt, who was one of my best students, from time to time up to the house for bulletins of what was going on. There were no telephones in those days. Mr. McKenzie was very pleasant the next morning. “You know, Mr. Falconbridge, I congratulate you on the double event; you got your client off and an addition to your family,' and I heard Harrison mutter something to M. C. Cameron which I was not meant to overhear, something about a General Gaol Delivery.” An examination of the family record will disclose the fact that this date coincides with the date of the birth of the present Dean of the Osgoode Hall Law School. Another favourite story told by Sir Glenholme and credited by him to the late Senator Kerr of Cobourg, runs as follows. A civil action was being tried in the town and one of the parties to the action, being hard pressed for evidence, secured as a witness on his behalf a complete stranger who happened to be in town for the day and who in the course of giving of his testimony committed the most open, flagrant and corrupt perjury. The trial judge directed the Sheriff to take him into custody and instructed the Crown prosecutor to present an indictment against him to the grand jury, which was then in session. The indictment was prepared and five minutes thereafter the grand jury returned a true bill and in another five minutes he was arraigned and asked if he was ready for his trial. He said he “s'posed” he was as ready as he was likely to be. In another hour or so he was tried and convicted. When asked if he had anything to say why the sentence of the court should not be passed upon him, he, evidently impressed with the speed with which justice was being administered in his case, naively replied: “I do not know your honour, you seem to have settled it up to your own satisfaction. I do not know that I have much to say except that it is a right smart little town to do business in.”
After the elevation of Mr. Harrison to the Bench in 1875, the standard of the firm was maintained by the introduction in his place of Mr. James Bethune, K.C., a very learned lawyer and able counsel and lecturer of the Law School on General Jurisprudence. Up to this time Sir Glenholme had devoted a good deal of his time to the practice of criminal law. After Mr. Harrison left the firm a dear old friend, the late Sir Thomas Galt, who had always taken a deep interest in him, advised him not to follow up the criminal business, stating at the same time that he did not consider it a good thing for a young man. He even went much further and said that he had never known a man who devoted himself very early in his professional career to criminal business but came to grief in some way or other. Sir Glenholme understood him and thereafter held very few criminal briefs, but devoted his time to the common law side of the office. The new firm thus continued under the name of Bethune, Osler and Moss until 1879, when Mr. Osler was appointed Judge of the Common Pleas Division. Then for the first time the name of Mr. Falconbridge appeared at the top of the letter-head in the firm name of Bethune, Moss, Falconbridge and Hoyles. In 1883 the dual title of Moss, Falconbridge and Barwick and Moss, Hoyles and Aylesworth was adopted. This office proved to be a veritable training school for the Bench. In 1887 Mr. Falconbridge was appointed Judge of the Queen's Bench Division, in 1900 Chief Justice of the same Court, and in June, 1908, he was Knighted and was thereafter known as Sir Glenholme Falconbridge. Although he had a provincial reputation before his elevation to the Bench, it was as Mr. Justice Falconbridge that he became known to every lawyer in the province. It was as a matter of choice that he went upon circuit, and I have reason to believe that the chief attraction was the opportunity it gave him to meet many members of the Bar whose acquaintance it would have been difficult to form if he had confined himself to Osgoode Hall.
To witness ludicrous and humourous situations falls to the lot of every trial judge, and Sir Glenholme possessed the faculty of picturing them so skilfully that he could entertain a company for hours in relating his experiences. Much of the humour of the following story told by him is lost through my inability to reproduce his exact words. He was presiding at the first Assize Court ever held in one of the outlying districts of New Ontario, and chanced to recall that a former acquaintance had gone to that territory many years before and he had lost all trace of him. He was not a bright student, and it was a mystery to his friends how he passed his final examinations. Upon making inquiries, the Chief Justice learned that his long-lost fellowstudent was the local Magistrate of the place and enjoyed the distinction of being called “Judge” by his fellow-townsmen. He intimated to the Sheriff that he would like to meet him again. The information reached the “ Judge," who early in the afternoon, with all the dignity becoming a man of his exalted rank, came into the court room. With his characteristic affability, the presiding Judge had a chair placed beside him, and after a cordial greeting, invited his friend to occupy it and went on with the trial, paying no further attention to him. His visitor remained in his position unmolested all the afternoon, and upon adjournment asked the Chief Justice if he wanted him to come back in the morning, explaining that he was very busy with his hay and unless he was needed he would not return. Sir Glenholme said there seemed to be some misunderstanding, and that if he had other work to do that he did not consider it necessary for him to attend on the morrow, whereupon the Squire said, with some show of annoyance: “ Then why did you send for me to-day? I supposed you wanted help upon some point of law.”
It appears to have been his lot, or perhaps it was of his own choosing, to have been the pioneer in introducing the Court of Assize in the new judicial districts. Upon another occasion he was holding the first court and all the officials were new and unskilled in their duties. It was a hot day in July, the court room was crowded, and all the windows were up as far as they would go. The Chief Justice noticed two young men hy an open window, paying no attention to the proceedings of the court, but talking to each other and apparently getting ready to enjoy a smoke. IIe said nothing, but kept one eye on the youths, who presently leaned over the sill with head and shoulders outside and legs inside. The Judge beckoned a constable up to his desk and without interrupting counsel whispered to him to make those men sit up straight, as the court room was no place to lounge in. He then went on taking notes, paying no attention to the constable. In a minute or two he heard a commotion in the court room, and, looking up, he saw his constable hard at work with the jury, who had been more or less lounging in their chairs in all sorts of easy attitudes. The constable had already straightened up three and was then busily engaged with number four. He had the three he had attended to sitting perfectly erect with both feet planted squarely on the floor, knees and hip bent at perfect right angles, the hands of each man covering his knees-each a living representation of an Egyptian graven image and looking very stiff and uncomfortable. The two idle spectators were still lolling out of the window. When narrating this incident the Chief Justice was asked what happened next. He smilingly replied: "I addressed a few personal remarks to the constable."
While it was a pleasure to practise before him even in an uphill fight, it was delightful and entertaining to play the role of spectator at the Assizes when he was presiding. He was an ideal judge with a jury, and he himself stated that when he had a jury he always tried to avoid coming to any conclusion of his own as to what the real facts were. That was the business of the jury and he wanted them to do it. lle carefully reviewed the evidence for them, but very rarely did any remark of his indicate which side he favoured in his own mind. It was not at all unusual to see the entire profession of a county town gathered within the Bar, whether or not they had any business to bring before his court. He appeared to appreciate their presence, and, apart from the experience gained by them in following an interesting case, and he possessed the faculty of making all trials interesting, he frequently rewarded them by drawing attention to some humourous situation without in any way detracting from the serious consideration of the question before the court. Above all, after the day's work was over, he dearly loved to relax from the exacting duties of the court room by joining a social circle of members of the Bar and their friends and forget for the time being that there were such things as lawsuits and trials. It was in gatherings of this kind or when seated about the fireside in the privacy of the home that one caught a glimpse of that versatile mind and kindly disposed heart. One did not need to linger long in his court to form a favourable opinion of his knowlege of the law and masterly skill in conducting a trial, nor could one be any length of time in his company without discovering him to be a most amiable and attractive gentleman. It was thus that by the entire profession he was respected as a judge and loved as a man.
He was a close reasoner and in his judgments rarely if ever wandered far afield, but adhered to the point under consideration. His scholarly attainments and command of English enabled him to express himself with a fluency and precision which made his judg
ments delightful reading. Two short paragraphs from a judgment delivered by him after a trial will suflice. A married woman brought an action against the father, mother and brother of her husband for damages for false representations made to her before marriage as to the character and financial standing of her husband and for entering into a fraudulent conspiracy to induce her to marry him. After carefully reviewing the evidence, he concluded his judgment as follows:
“ The plaintiff and her friends allowed the marriage ceremony to be celebrated with great precipitation. Unless J.B. has woefully changed for the worse in six years, I would have thought that a girl of ordinary discernment would have discovered, even in the very brief courtship which took place, that he was not a very safe person to whom to entrust her happiness, be the commendations of his father and mother never so warm.
She took her chances and must now, as far as this Court is concerned, read into her contract the words ‘for better for worse, for richer for poorer.' The praise of the father, the brother, and particularly of the mother, are simplex commendatio que non obligat.”
Although his judicial duties pressed heavily upon him, he found ample time for his early predilection for the classies and produced several metrical translations of the Greek and Latin poets. He did not air his knowledge of the classics by burdening his conversativn or writings with quotations from them, and when he did resort to Greek or Latin it was because the plain and simple English would not serve his purpose. He could not endure the use of a false accent or quantity by others, as the following incident well illustrates. somewhat prominent Q.C. was arguing before him on behalf of a client afflicted with paresis which he repeatedly pronounced pa-ree-sis with a painfuly strong acrent on the second syllable. The Chief Justice did not wish to embarrass him by correcting him, but took occasion to interject some remark bringing in more than once the word the counsel had so grossly distorted, but correctly pronouncing it párësis. The object lesson was lost upon the offending lawyer, who seemed to go out of his way to refer again and again to his unfortunate client's pa-rée-sis. The judge writhed under the torture until he could stand it no longer and broke in upon the argument with “ Excuse me, Jr. but may I ask if you read Greek?” The disconcerted counsel stared at him and answered “Why, no, my Lord, I never learned Greek.” The Chief Justice added: “I am sorry, be(ause if you had I would like to ask you to look at a Greek dictionary, where you'll see that that word “paresis” is spelled with an epsilon and not with an eta.” The counsel bowed contentedly and proceeded with his argument, avoiding thereafter any attempt to use the word