eight times in the year; he admits or rejects, gives or refuses, as he thinks fit. Formerly these terms lasted only a day; now they continue a week, sometimes a fortnight. These cases Mr. Howard, in the volume before us, has reported at some length, and we believe carefully. The work is well supported; indeed, our practice is so Protean in its bewildering forms, that an attorney can scarcely do without the work. It is this usefulness that we complain of, as showing that justice takes more note of the forms than of the merits of the cases which are laid before her.

From these Reports we have selected a few cases as examples, in order to give men, who take a common sense and not a special term view of their affairs, an opportunity of knowing and appreciating the exquisite subtlety with which the justices treat the important question of the difference between tweedledum and tweedledee.

6

Be it known to the 'lay gents' that in order to change the place of trial, or the venue,' an affidavit of the convenience and necessity of witnesses is required. In Dimon vs. Dimon, vol. 2, p. 91, the defendant in his affidavit named his witnesses: "who each and all reside in Tompkins county, are material witnesses for the defendant on the trial of this cause, without the testimony of whom, and the testimony of each and every of whom, he cannot safely proceed, &c." The justice denied the motion, because the affidavit did not state that each and every of the witnesses were material, &c. But the affidavit did state that the testimony of each and every witness was material; and as there is nothing material in a witness but his testimony, and as the affidavit says that all the witnesses are material, it would seem to be expressed as clearly as possible that each and every of the witnesses were material. Certainly there is not a shadow of difference in the meaning.

In the case of Harris vs. Clark, page 82 of the same number, the same motion was denied, because the defendant in his affidavit swears: "that he is advised by counsel, and verily believes, the defendant cannot safely proceed to the trial of this cause without the testimony

of all and every of the witnesses above named." It should have been, quoth the justice, each and every of the witnesses. If there is any difference between the two, all and every expresses the required necessity of the witnesses more fully than each and every. * Mills vs. Adsit, p. 83, is a similar case. The affidavit of the defendant was as follows: "that he had a good and substantial defence on the merits to the whole of the said plaintiff's demand, as he is advised by his said counsel and believes to be true; that he has also fully and fairly disclosed to his said counsel what he expects to prove in the trial of this cause, by each and every of the witnesses hereinafter named; that he cannot safely proceed to the trial of this cause without the benefit of the testimony of each and every of the said witnesses; that the testimony of each and every of the said witnesses is material and necessary to this deponent, on the trial of the said cause, as he is advised by his said counsel, and verily believes to be true, &c." Bronson denied the motion, because the words "as he is advised by his said counsel," &c. were not again inserted after witnesses, as if the last paragraph did not say every thing that could be said. Strain the construction as you please, and the only fault is an error in legal grammar; but "mala grammatica non vitiat chartam," says the axiom. Comment is unnecessary on these cases. It is difficult to imagine how men of ability, information and high position, can condescend to quibbles and equivocations for which children would be whipped by conscientious parents.

The reports are full of such special absurdities. In Kellog vs. Kellog, v. 2, a declaration in ejectment was served on the wife of the defendant. Defendant appeared to the declaration. Afterwards, it was moved that the proceedings should be set aside, because the wife was not "on the premises" at the time of the service, according to the letter of the statute. The object of the requisitions of the statute is to ensure to the defendant a knowledge of the proceedings against him. In this case no injury resulted to him; he was duly informed of the service, assented to it, and appeared in the action. The Chief

Justice, nevertheless, held that such an irregularity was fatal, and set aside the proceedings.

In another case, defendant swore to the merits of his defence, but in entitling his affidavit misspelt the name of the plaintiff he named him Sundeland instead of Sandland. Held bad.

Sometimes papers must be endorsed, sometimes they must not. Sometimes they must be entitled in one Court, at times in another. There appears to be no general rule. In Stacy vs. Farnham, v. 2, p. 26, an affidavit of ownership was attached to a writ of replevin. The proceedings were set aside because the affidavit was entitled in the cause. In Higham vs. Hayes, v. 2, p. 27, it was refused to set aside an inquest, because the defendant's affidavit of merits was not entitled in the cause. In another case, a defendant moved to set aside a default which had been taken against him. In his affidavit he swore that he had fully and fairly stated the case in the above entitled cause to Samuel W. Jackson, Esq., his counsel," &c. His motion was denied, because Jackson was not a counsellor of the court, but only an attorney.

66

In Campbell vs. Spencer, the papers were served as appears by the affidavit of service, viz: "he served on L. H. Card, plaintiff's attorney, a copy of the foregoing affidavit and notice, by leaving the same in a conspicuous place in his office at the time above mentioned, the said L. H. Card being then absent therefrom." Nelson held the service bad, because the affidavit did not state that "no person was in the office."

§ In another, a motion was objected to on the ground that the papers, on which it was based, were not served in a wrapper, according to the 101st rule of court. The notice of motion was written on the inside of the wrapper; consequently all the papers were not enclosed in a wrapper. C. J. Nelson denied the motion accordingly.

A Jewish Rabbi undertook a commentary on the Talmud; but on the cover of his copy was a sketch of Moses, well covered with a fur wrapper, but unprovided with shoe or sandal. The Rabbi was stopped in cortice. Here was a difficulty. Was this Moses taken

Semble in winter, from the fur wrapper.

And on this knotty point the Rabbi spent thirty years before beginning his commentary. This is a picture, only exaggerated as to time, of much of the special term practice. Summum jus, it seems, is no longer summa injuria, but summa ineptia as well. We might cite many more examples, were it not too melancholy to see grey-haired men thus trifling with truth. Were any of the justices millionaires, we might suppose that they were training their souls, at the special terms, for the difficult passage of the needle's eye.

It is thus, the judges of the supreme court of this state teach the young attorney the too-easily learned lesson of degrading equivocation, to look not at the case but at the costs, and to wriggle, eel-like, through the grasp of the man who has justice on his side. It is thus they furnish bread to the needy wretches whose legal acquisitions do not extend beyond the rule-book, and destroy the legitimate business and respectability of the profession. The straight-forward merchant, who sees nothing in an action at law but the justice of his cause, cannot be made to understand that it is right and necessary that the wrong side should prevail, because the words "all and every" have been mistaken for "each and every." He avoids the courts, and has recourse, if possible, to compromise and arbitration.

Through this slough of word-mongering all young attorneys must pass. There is no avoiding it. Liberal practice and gentlemanly feeling are no safeguard. They are only life-preservers, which may keep their heads above water and bear them safely over. We are within bounds in saying, that ninetenths of the time and labor expended by a young practitioner are taken up in settling and adjusting points of practice which have nothing to do with the merits of the case, with justice, or with common sense.

What is the province of a judge?

To clear up difficulties; not to make them. He has no right to make arbitrary rules and forms of practice, and then to use those rules and forms to defeat the object for which he was nominated. We do not want a judge who, like an Indian medicine-man, thinks his manipulations and incantations necessary to the success of his simples. An unjust or foolish statute is a disease he cannot cure; but the milder attacks of common law or common practice absurdity, admit of remedies which a judicious magistrate could easily administer, had he the suitable skill and freedom from prejudice. Such men are wanted, and such men the people will be sure to elect.

The present state of things cannot last forever. There is a convention, and the talk is of reformn. We may hope, if not for a code, at least for a thorough sifting and weeding out of common-law follies; and may Special Term distinctions perish with the rest. And when the Law and not the Letter prevails, there may come a day when the officers and ministers of justice shall stand forth as respectable members of a noble and practical profession, and be no longer the despised of Cicero and of Bolingbroke - Leguleius quidam cautus et acutus præco actionum, cautor formularum, auceps syllabarum.

IN the opinion of those who have made the most industrious researches into the traditions and records of antiquity, the mythology of the Pagans ascended no higher than the deluge. The Hindoos had an indistinct notion of of a remote and golden age, when man had no cause to labor-when the earth yielded its fruits spontaneously-the air was filled with the fragrance of flowers-the sight was refreshed with the brightest and softest hues-the warbling of birds, and the music of the spheres charmed his hearing-ease and contentment, health, happiness, and long life were his portion in one perennial spring. This delightful romance originated, without doubt, in some of the lingering recollections of Noah, or his sons, transmitted to their descendants before the confession of tongues, which dispersed them from the plains

of Shinar; and this legend was derived by the Greeks of after ages, from the Orientals of Indostan. It unquestionably alludes to the garden of Eden, and to an antediluvian age and race. Why it was lost to those branches of Noah's posterity, who wandered in other directions, after the dispersion from Babel, cannot be accounted for; but there are no traces of it before we come to the Mosaical account of the creation of the world,

The first object of deification, after the flood, both in India and Egypt, was Noah, whose wisdom in building and navigating the Ark over "that shoreless ocean," filled his descendants with astonishment, admiration, and awe. They saw in him the father of all men ; they believed him the creator of all things; and as he receded from their sight, and the mist of time began to ob

scure his mortal lineaments, they ascribed to him the power and attributes of a God. If he ever gave them any instruction regarding the pure worship of the Creator, they lost sight of it when he was no longer present, and transferred their gratitude and reverence to sensible images representing him as rising from the sea, possessed of universal dominion, producing and controlling all things by his power. They viewed the Ark as a goddess, the common mother of all things, the companion of Noah, and both-the common parents of gods and men.

Immediately after the separation at Babel, one branch of the descendants of Ham migrated to Egypt, and worshipped him as Osiris, and the Ark as Isis. Enshrining Osiris became a ceremony of great pomp and splendor. Twice a year, a personification of Noah or Ham-or Oannes or Thoth -for he had many appellations, was placed in a magnificent ark, and conveyed through the streets, "amidst the shouts of adoring multitudes." The Egyptians also instituted religious rites in commemoration of his rescue from the flood. They carried an ark in triumphal procession, in token of "the debarkation of the patriarch," after which they descended into the sea, and the keepers of the robes, aided by the priests, took from a consecrated chest a little ark of gold, into which they poured clean water, and proclaimed, with loud acclamations, that "Osiris was safe."

The form of the ark was also a fruitful source of objects for idolatrous worship. A circular crescent-shape invested objects with a peculiar sanctity; hence the worship of the moon, and of the serpent, for his circular writhings. The curved horns of the cow and bull, rendered those animals sacred to Isis, and objects of universal homage. In the progress of time, accidents operating upon the imaginations of men, enlarged their catalogue of deities; and from deeming a curve or an image a symbol of their primary objects, they considered them distinct divinities, and established for their service appropriate rites. They denominated the serpent, Oub; and after his deification, Ob-El-the Serpent God. The temples erected to his worship were cylindrical, and were called Ob-El-Es-Ca, or Obelisk-"A

temple for the radiant serpent God." The serpent was admired for his keen eye and curious colors; and was also reverenced as a symbol of defence, because anything encircled by his terrible folds was secure from external assault.

66

Another branch of the idolatrous family of Ham may be traced in India, where his descendants deified him in common with their progenitor, Noah. They saw no sensible object his equal in glory; but the sun approaching nearest to his grandeur, they called that luminary Ham, or the Sun," in honor of their father, and soon transferred their adorations to him, as the source of all honor and happiness. Jupiter Ammon, the word Jupiter being an addition to "Ham-On," or "Ham the Sun," was the most renowned deity of antiquity.

From this followed the worship of fire, as an emanation from the sun, and the temples dedicated to the sun or fire, were denominated Pi-Ur-Am-Ait-literally, Pyramid; the form of which is deduced from the figure of an ascending flame.

The element which sustained the ark was another object of adoration; and the wanderers from Shinar carried the worship of water to Egypt and India, and celebrated divine rites to the Nile and the Ganges.-The Hindoos worsipped, also, many objects as types of the ark; such, for example, as the Ibis, an aquatic bird, because it sat like a boat upon the water. In tracing the analogy of languages, it appears undoubted that Boodha, the great God of the Hindoos, is derived from Boodh, a boat, the ark itself: and that the Woden of the Goths, the Maheena of the friendly Islands in the Pacific Ocean-the Siamese Gautma, and the Chinese Foe, all came from the same Chaldaic original.

The Arkite idolatry, including Osiris, Isis, Apis, Ibis, and everything appertaining to the deluge-the Oophite, or Serpent-worship, and the Solar, or Fireworship, are believed to be the three radical fountains from whence all systems of mythology had their origin.

As the human race spread gradually over the coasts of Asia Minor and the north and west of Europe, divine rites were celebrated for the patriarch, under the appellations of Xuth, Thor, Mercurius, and Thuisco. In succeeding

ages different nations enlarged or modified the theories which had been handed down, adapting them to their own superstitions, or the peculiar temperament of individuals. The ferocious and austere, the depraved and abandoned of every country, suited their gods to their perverse, or their polluted imaginations. The latter practised scandalous and revolting rites, while the former wrought up their horrid mysteries with cruel ingenuity, immolating human victims upon their altars.

The mythology of the Greeks partook of their genius and politeness. In place of the dark and gloomy mysteries of the Druids, or the bloody and frightful rites of the Asiatics, or the brutalizing ceremonies of Egypt and Ethiopia, they poured out libations to the gods-invoked their clemency and protection with music, poetry, and eloquence, consecrating the choicest gifts, and the most costly productions of the arts to Apollo, at Delphi, and Jupiter Olympias, at Elis.

But in the idol-worship of every age and country, while some touches of gratitude are apparent towards that supernatural power which the worshippers contemplate; whether under the Arkite stupidity of Boodha; the hideous Oophite, Ob-El-Ha; the more elevated form of Osiris; the elegant and sublime images of Jupiter and Apollo, or the beautiful representations of Venus and Ceres, all felt a dread and terror of the unknown deity which they ignorantly worshipped, and varied their rites according to their impulses of hope or fear.

Through all tradition and history, families and countries retain traces to the latest posterity, of the tempers, habits, and language of their founders; hence the polished, poetical, and philosophical race of Hellenes, among the Greeks, while the contemporary Pelasgii. another tribe of those people, inherit the gloomy, ferocious, and brutal traits of their father, Pelasgus.

The history of Rome testifies, through all its changes, (until the subversion of the empire) to the haughty and warlike character of Romulus, and the arbitrary selfishness, and disregard of justice, which marked his robber followers. Scarcely a country of antiquity, or of modern times, can be named, but some of the peculiarities of its earliest progenitors may be perceived in its character, to ts latest period. So, in paying divine honors, the sanctions of tradition preserved the outlines of the original deity; yet religious rites became cruel and sanguinary, where the votaries deprecated the judgments of gods, whom they deemed barbarous, like themselves: while with more amiable and polished people, a naiad in every rill was an object of adoration-the trees concealed dryads and wood-nymphs, emanations from the deity-the stars, and the hosts of heaven were invoked to overrule the condition of men and prosper their concerns.

The endless catalogue of idols, and the confused and mingled rites discovered in distant countries, and in successive ages, partake, in different degrees, of all the original objects and modes of Pagan worship. The ceremonies which primarily appertained to distinct deities, are blended in the wildest disorder; and to them are superadded unnatural and shocking observances, the offspring of the most perverse and horrible imaginations. These prove the worthlessness of heathen worship, and attest the verity of that revelation, which declares the being of one, holy, omniscient God, whose immutable character and attributes are power, wisdom, justice, truth, benevolence, and mercy, which having brought "life and immortality to light," dispels the "darkness which shrouded the heathen, and points to the glorious and joyful elevation of immortalityEternity and Heaven.