Mr. Meeson's Will: Chapter 20

Chapter 20

JAMES BREAKS DOWN.

The Registrar, not Augusta's dear doctor Probate, but another Registrar,
rose and called on the case of Meeson v. Addison, and Another, and in an
instant the wretched James Short was on his legs to open the case.

"What is that gentleman's name?" Augusta heard the Judge ask of the
clerk, after making two or three frantic efforts to attract his
attention--a proceeding that the position of his desk rendered very
difficult.

"Short, my Lord."

"Do you appear alone for the plaintiff, Mr. Short?" asked the Judge,
with emphasis.

"Yes, my Lord, I do," answered James, and as he said it every pair of
eyes in that crowded assembly fixed themselves upon him, and a sort of
audible smile seemed to run round the court. The thing not unnaturally
struck the professional mind as ludicrous and without precedent.

"And who appears for the defendant?"

"I understand, my Lord," said the learned Attorney-General, "that all my
learned friends on these two benches appear together, with myself, for
one or other of the defendants, or are watching the case in the interest
of legatees."

Here a decided titter interrupted him.

"I may add that the interests involved in this case are very large
indeed, which accounts for the number of counsel connected in one way or
other with the defence."

"Quite so, Mr. Attorney," said the Judge: "but, really, the forces seem a
little out of proportion. Of course the matter is not one in which the
Court can interfere."

"If your Lordship will allow me," said James, "the only reason that
the plaintiff is so poorly represented is that the funds to brief
other council were, I understand, not forthcoming. I am, however, well
versed in the case and, with your Lordship's permission, will do my
best with it."

"Very well, Mr. Short," said the learned Judge, looking at him almost
with pity, "state your case."

James--in the midst of a silence that could be felt--unfolded his
pleadings, and, as he did so, for the first time a sickening sense of
nervousness took hold of him and made him tremble, and, of a sudden, his
mind became dark. Most of us have undergone this sensation at one time or
another, with less cause then had poor James. There he was, put up almost
for the first time in his life to conduct, single-handed, a most
important case, upon which it was scarcely too much to say the interest
of the entire country was concentrated. Nor was this all. Opposed to him
were about twenty counsel, all of them men of experience, and including
in their ranks some of the most famous leaders in England: and, what was
more, the court was densely crowded with scores of men of his own
profession, every one of whom was, he felt, regarding him with curiosity
not unmixed with pity. Then, there was the tremendous responsibility
which literally seemed to crush him, though he had never quite realised
it before.

"May it please your Lordship," he began; and then, as I have said, his
mind became a ghastly blank, in which dim and formless ideas flitted
vaguely to and fro.

There was a pause--a painful pause.

"Read your pleadings aloud," whispered a barrister who was sitting next
him, and realised his plight.

This was an idea. One can read pleadings when one cannot collect one's
ideas to speak. It is not usual to do so. The counsel in a cause states
the substance of the pleadings, leaving the Court to refer to them if it
thinks necessary. But still there was nothing absolutely wrong about it;
so he snatched at the papers and promptly began:

"(I.) The plaintiff is the sole and universal legatee under the true last
will of Jonathan Meeson, deceased, late of Pompadour Hall, in the County
of Warwick, who died on the 23rd of December, 1885, the said will being
undated, but duly executed on, or subsequent to, the 22nd day of
December, 1885."

Here the learned Judge lifted his eyebrows in remonstrance, and cleared
his throat preparatory to interfering; but apparently thought better of
it, for he took up a blue pencil and made a note of the date of the will.

"(II.)," went on James. "On the 21st day of May, 1886, probate of an
alleged will of the said Jonathan Meeson was granted to the defendants,
the said will bearing date the 10th day of November, 1885. The
plaintiff claims--

"(1.) That the court shall revoke probate of the said alleged will of the
said Jonathan Meeson, bearing date the 10th day of November, 1885,
granted to the defendants on the 21st day of May, 1886.

"(2.) A grant of letters of administration to the plaintiff with the
will executed on or subsequent to the 22nd day of December,1885, annexed.
(Signed) JAMES SHORT."

"May it please your Lordship." James began, again feeling dimly that he
had read enough pleadings, "the defendants have filed an answer pleading
that the will of the 22nd of December was not duly executed in accordance
with the statute, and that the testator did not know and approve its
contents, and an amended answer pleading that the said alleged will, if
executed, was obtained by the undue influence of Augusta Smithers"--and
once more his nervousness overcame him, and he pulled up with a jerk.

Then came another pause even more dreadful than the first.

The Judge took another note, as slowly as he could, and once more cleared
his throat; but poor James could not go on. He could only wish that he
might then and there expire, rather than face the hideous humiliation of
such a failure. But he would have failed, for his very brain was whirling
like that of a drunken man, had it not been for an occurrence that caused
him for ever after to bless the name of Fiddlestick, Q.C., as the name of
an eminent counsel is not often blessed in this ungrateful world. For
Fiddlestick, Q.C., who, it will be remembered, was one of the leaders for
the defendants, had been watching his unfortunate antagonist, till,
realising how sorry was his plight, a sense of pity filled his learned
breast. Perhaps he may have remembered some occasion, in the dim and
distant corner of the past, when he had suffered from a similar access of
frantic terror, or perhaps he may have been sorry to think that a young
man should lose such an unrivalled opportunity of making a name. Anyhow,
he did a noble act. As it happened, he was sitting at the right-hand
corner of the Queen's counsel seats, and piled upon the desk before him
was a tremendous mass of law reports which his clerk had arranged there,
containing cases to which it might become necessary to refer. Now, in the
presence of these law reports, Mr. Fiddlestick, in the goodness of his
heart, saw an opportunity of creating a diversion, and he created it with
a vengeance. For, throwing his weight suddenly forward as though by
accident, or in a movement of impatience, he brought his bent arm against
the pile with such force, that he sent every book, and there must have
been more than twenty of them, over the desk, right on to the head and
shoulders of his choleric client, Mr. Addison, who was sitting
immediately beneath, on the solicitors' bench.

Down went the books with a crash and a bang, and, carried away by their
weight, down went Mr. Addison on to his nose among them--a contingency
that Fiddlestick, Q.C., by-the-way, had not foreseen, for he had
overlooked the fact of his client's vicinity.

The Judge made an awful face, and then, realising the ludicrous nature of
the scene, his features relaxed into a smile. But Mr. Addison did not
smile. He bounded up off the floor, books slipping off his back in every
direction, and, holding his nose (which was injured) with one hand, came
skipping right at his learned adviser.

"You did it on purpose!" he almost shouted, quite forgetting where he
was; "just let me get at him, I'll have his wig off!" and then, without
waiting for any more, the entire audience burst out into a roar of
laughter, which, however, unseemly, was perfectly reasonable; during
which Mr. Fiddlestick could be seen apologising in dumb show, with a
bland smile upon his countenance, while Mr. News and Mr. Roscoe between
them dragged the outraged Addison to his seat, and proffered him
handkerchiefs to wipe his bleeding nose.

James saw the whole thing, and forgetting his position, laughed too; and,
for some mysterious reason, with the laugh his nervousness passed away.

The usher shouted "Silence!" with tremendous energy, and before the sound
had died away James was addressing the Court in a clear and vigorous
voice, conscious that he was a thorough master of his case, and the words
to state it in would not fail him. Fiddlestick, Q.C., had saved him!

"May it please your Lordship," he began, "the details of this case are of
as remarkable an order as any that to my knowledge have been brought
before the Court. The plaintiff, Eustace Meeson, is the sole next-of-kin
of Jonathan Meeson, Esquire, the late head of the well known Birmingham
publishing firm of Meeson, Addison, and Roscoe. Under a will, bearing
date the 8th of May, 1880, the plaintiff was left sole heir to the great
wealth of his uncle--that is, with the exception of some legacies. Under
a second will, now relied on by the defendants, and dated the 10th
November, 1885, the plaintiff was entirely disinherited, and the present
defendants, together with some six or eight legatees, were constituted
the sole beneficiaries. On or about the 22nd December, 1885, however, the
testator executed a third testamentary document under which the plaintiff
takes the entire property, and this is the document now propounded. This
testamentary document, or, rather, will--for I submit that it is in
every sense a properly executed will--is tattooed upon the
shoulders"--(Sensation in the court)--"is tattooed upon the shoulders of
a young lady, Miss Augusta Smithers, who will presently be called before
your Lordship; and to prevent any misunderstanding, I may as well at once
state that since this event this lady has become engaged to be married to
the plaintiff (Renewed sensation.)

"Such, my Lord, are the main outlines of the case that I have to present
for the consideration of the Court, which I think your Lordship will
understand is of so remarkable and unprecedented a nature that I must
crave your Lordship's indulgence if I proceed to open it at some length,
beginning the history at its commencement."

By this time James Short had completely recovered his nerve, and was,
indeed, almost oblivious of the fact that there was anybody present in
the court, except the learned Judge and himself. Going back to the
beginning, he detailed the early history of the relationship between
Eustace Meeson and his uncle, the publisher, with which this record has
nothing to do. Thence he passed to the history of Augusta's relation with
the firm of Meeson and Co., which, as nearly everybody in the court, not
excepting the Judge, had read "Jemima's Vow," was very interesting to his
auditors. Then he went on to the scene between Augusta and the publisher,
and detailed how Eustace had interfered, which interference had led to a
violent quarrel, resulting in the young man's disinheritance. Passing on,
he detailed how the publisher and the published had taken passage in the
same vessel, and the tragic occurrences which followed down to Augusta's
final rescue and arrival in England, and finally ended his spirited
opening by appealing to the Court not to allow its mind to be influenced
by the fact that since these events the two chief actors had become
engaged to be married, which struck him, he said, as a very fitting
climax to so romantic a story.

At last he ceased, and amidst a little buzz of applause, for the speech
had really been a very fine one, sat down. As he did so he glanced at the
clock. He had been on his legs for nearly two hours, and yet it seemed to
him but a very little while. In another moment he was up again and had
called his first witness--Eustace Meeson.

Eustace's evidence was of a rather formal order, and was necessarily
limited to an account of the relations between his uncle and himself, and
between himself and Augusta. Such as it was, however, he gave it very
well, and with a complete openness that appeared to produce a favorable
impression on the Court.

Then Fiddlestick, Q.C., rose to cross-examine, devoting his efforts to
trying to make Eustace admit that his behaviour had been of a nature to
amply justify his uncle's behaviour. But there was not very much to be
made out of it. Eustace detailed all that had passed freely enough, and
it simply amounted to the fact that there had been angry words between
the two as regards the treatment that Augusta had met with at the hands
of the firm. In short, Fiddlestick could not do anything with him, and,
after ten minutes of it, sat down without having advanced the case to any
appreciable extent. Then several of the other counsel asked a question or
two apiece, after which Eustace was told to stand down, and Lady
Holmhurst was called. Lady Holmhurst's evidence was very short, merely
amounting to the fact that she had seen Augusta's shoulders on board the
Kangaroo, and that there was not then a sign of tattoo marks upon them,
and when she saw them again in London they were tattooed. No attempt was
made to cross-examine her, and on the termination of her evidence, the
Court adjourned for lunch. When it reassembled James Short called
Augusta, and a murmur of expectation arose from the densely crowded
audience, as--feeling very sick at heart, and looking more beautiful than
ever--she stepped towards the box.

As she did so the Attorney-General rose.

"I must object, my Lord," he said, "on behalf of the defendants, to this
witness being allowed to enter the box."

"Upon what grounds, Mr. Attorney?" said his Lordship.

"Upon the ground that her mouth is, _ipso facto_, closed. If we are to
believe the plaintiff's story, this young lady is herself the will of
Jonathan Meeson, and, being so, is certainly, I submit, not competent to
give evidence. There is no precedent for a document giving evidence, and
I presume that the witness must be looked upon as a document."

"But, Mr. Attorney," said the Judge, "a document is evidence, and
evidence of the best sort."

"Undoubtedly, my Lord; and we have no objection to the document being
exhibited for the court to draw its own conclusion from, but we deny that
it is entitled to speak in its own explanation. A document is a thing
which speaks by its written characters. It cannot take to itself a
tongue, and speak by word of mouth also; and, in support of this, I may
call your Lordship's attention to the general principles of law governing
the interpretation of written documents."

"I am quite aware of those principles, Mr. Attorney, and I cannot see
that they touch this question."

"As your Lordship pleases. Then I will fall back upon my main contention,
that Miss Smithers is, for the purposes of this case, a document and
nothing but a document, and has no more right to open her mouth in
support of the plaintiff's case, than would any paper will, if it could
be miraculously endowed with speech."

"Well," said the Judge, "it certainly strikes me as a novel point. What
have you to say to it, Mr. Short?"

All eyes were now turned upon James, for it was felt that if the point
was decided against him the case was lost.

"The point to which I wish you to address yourself, Mr. Short," went on
the learned Judge, "is--Is the personality of Miss Smithers so totally
lost and merged in what, for want of a better term I must call her
documentary capacity, as to take away from her the right to appear before
this Court like any other sane human being, and give evidence of events
connected with its execution?"

"If your Lordship pleases," said James, "I maintain that this is not so.
I maintain that the document remains the document; and that for all
purposes, including the giving of evidence concerning its execution, Miss
Smithers still remains Miss Smithers. It would surely be absurd to argue
that because a person has a deed executed upon her she was, _ipso facto_,
incapacitated from giving evidence concerning it, on the mere ground that
she was _it_. Further, such a decision would be contrary to equity and
good policy, for persons could not so lightly be deprived of their
natural rights. Also, in this case, the plaintiff's action would be
absolutely put an end to by any such decision, seeing that the signature
of Jonathan Meeson and the attesting witnesses to the will could not, of
course, be recognised in their tattooed form, and there is no other
living person who could depose under what circumstances the signature
came to be there. I submit that the objection should be overruled."

"This," said his Lordship, in giving his decision "is a very curious
point, and one which, when first raised by the learned Attorney-General,
struck me with some force; but, on considering it and hearing Mr. Short,
I am convinced that it is an objection that cannot be supported" (here
Eustace gave a sigh of relief). "It is argued on the part of the
defendant that Miss Smithers is, for the purposes of this case a
document, a document, and nothing but a document, and as such that her
mouth is shut. Now, I think that the learned Attorney-General cannot have
thought this matter out when he came to that conclusion. What are the
circumstances? A will is supposed to have been tattooed upon this lady's
skin; but is the skin the whole person? Does not the intelligence remain,
and the individuality? I think that I can put what I mean more clearly by
means of an illustration. Let us suppose that I were to uphold the
defendant's objection, and that, as a consequence, the plaintiff's case
were to break down. Then let us suppose that the plaintiff had persuaded
the witness to be partially skinned"--(here Augusta nearly jumped from her
seat)--"and that she, having survived the operation, was again tendered
to the court as a witness, would the Court then be able, under any
possibility, to refuse to accept her evidence? The document, in the form
of human parchment, would then be in the hands of the officers of the
Court, and the person from whom the parchment had been removed, would
also be before the Court. Could it be still maintained that the two were
so identical and inseparable that the disabilities attaching to a
document must necessarily attach to the person? In my opinion, certainly
not. Or, to take another case, let us suppose that the will had been
tattooed upon the leg of a person, and, under similar circumstances, the
leg were cut off and produced before the Court, either in a flesh or a
mummified condition; could it then be seriously advanced that because the
inscribed leg--standing on the table before the Court--had once belonged
to the witness sitting in the witness-box, therefore it was not competent
for the witness to give evidence on account of his or her documentary
attributes? Certainly it could not. Therefore, it seems to me that that
which is separable must, for the purpose of law, be taken as already
separated, and that the will on the back of this witness must be looked
upon as though it were in the hands at this moment, of the officers of
the Court, and consequently I overrule the objection."

"Will your Lordship take a note of your Lordship's decision?" asked the
Attorney-General in view of an appeal.

"Certainly, Mr. Attorney. Let this witness be sworn."

Back to chapter list of: Mr. Meeson's Will