1867 and after 193

thorities to do before they come to the task of de-
cision.

Lawyers in the latter half of life can bear wit-
ness to some minor but possibly interesting changes
in arguments. There is a difference observable
in the kind of education or culture of the lawyers
in the last two generations. Formerly there was
more education in common, so to speak, more of
a common literature and lore, so that lawyers
could, and did, sprinkle their arguments with
quotations and allusions, not only for ornamenta-
tion but in order to bring to bear associations
which would emphasize their points. Quotations
from the Bible and Shakespeare's plays could be
used with effect on all educated minds during the
nineteenth century, and other works had their
turns in the common lore of one generation and
another. When Thomas Jenings in 1790 ¹³ at-
tacked what he thought to be irrelevant prece-
dents with the allusion,

As absurd as quoting the ancient Romish canons respecting
the annulling of Shandy's baptism, which occasioned Toby to
remark "but what has ail this to do with the child of a Prot-
estant gentleman, christened Tristram, against the will of his
friends and relations?"—

when Jenings quoted that question, and when law-
yers in the latter half of the nineteenth century
retorted, "Chops and Tomato Sauce!" as they
often did for a similar purpose, they were alike
using current coin; and the judges and auditors in
one time and the other were probably affected
alike. But there is no literature in common now,
no quotations and allusions which would be un-

13. Dulany v. Wells, 3 Harris & McHenry, 49.