LORD ST. HELIER--AMERICAN AND ENGLISH METHODS--MR. BENJAMIN
If you care for a clear view of English life and of Englishmen you
need not always go to the mountain tops in search of it. If you can
find a man who stands for what is typical, who is in the front rank,
but not among the very foremost, who has, in a high degree, the
qualities by which the average Englishman, having them in a much less
degree, succeeds, he is as well worth studying for this purpose as
the most illustrious of them all. I could name many such men. I
will take one whom I knew well for many years; to whose kindness I
owed much; whom I saw often in London and stayed with often in the
country; for whose memory I have that kind of affection which
survives even a sense of many obligations. I mean Lord St. Helier.
He was Mr. Francis Jeune when I first knew him, and when he married
Mrs. Stanley. Later he became Sir Francis Jeune, and finally found
his way into that House of Lords which it is now the fashion among
one set of politicians to decry. I suppose nobody would deny that,
whatever {365} be the merits or demerits of the hereditary principle,
this House contains more distinguished and supremely able men than
any other body that can be named. For such a man as Francis Jeune it
was the natural and pre-ordained abode when his honourable career
reached or approached its climax.
Sir Francis Jeune was a man who made the most of his abilities and
opportunities. He was a good lawyer, a good judge, and, after his
marriage with Mrs. Stanley, a considerable social force. It is among
the peculiarities of English life that the Presidency of the Divorce
Court should be one of four great prizes at the English Bar. The
Lord High Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice, and the Master of the
Rolls hold the other three most coveted places, and are rewarded by
appointments such as the legal profession in no other country can
hope for. The dignity of all these positions is very great, and the
pay corresponds to the dignity.
If we contrast the splendid figures with the salaries of the Judges
of the Supreme Court at the United States, the motto of the Republic
would seem to be Hamlet's "Thrift, thrift, Horatio." But if the
levelling doctrines of the present day were to prevail, the British
judges would soon descend to the money level of the American. I do
not imagine they will. The illiberal treatment of public servants
has never been popular in England.
There is nevertheless something in these high legal posts which
attracts men to whom the pay, high as it is, can be no attraction.
But that {366} again only sharpens the contrast. The average income
of the magnates at the American Bar being greater than at the
English, and the salaries of the American judges being less than half
those of the English judges, why should an American lawyer of the
first class ever accept a judicial office? Clearly there are other
and higher motives than mere money. There are Americans, we are
told, who recognize in American life no motive higher than money.
But are they Americans, or are they of the true American type? You
might have asked Mr. Roosevelt when he was here last May. He is the
most famous of living Americans and he certainly did not become so by
the worship of money.
I have strayed far from Sir Francis Jeune, but the law and the things
of the law must ever have an attraction for any one who has at any
time, no matter how long ago, been in contact with them; otherwise
than as a client. And I will stray further still in order to add
that one of the greatest names at the English Bar, and now one of the
greatest memories, is that of an American. I mean, of course, Mr.
Benjamin. He had no superior. It is doubtful whether he had an
equal in those duties of his profession in which he most cared to
excel. I knew him a little. He sometimes talked to me of his
career; surely the most remarkable at the English or perhaps any
other Bar, since he was fifty-three when he came to this country. He
always acknowledged heartily the kindness shown him, the facilities
given him, the aid even of men {367} who foresaw in him a dangerous
rival, to make his path smooth. I said to him once:
"But you came here as the representative of a Lost Cause which the
English had at one time almost made their own. That may have helped."
"Oh, no; the friendship of the governing classes in England for the
Confederacy had passed into history. They had discovered their
mistake. As they would say, they had backed the wrong horse. It was
still some years to the Geneva Arbitration but they had begun to be
aware they would have to pay, as others do when they put their money
on a loser. However, I don't think that counted one way or the
other. What did count was the good-will of English lawyers to
another lawyer. That you can always depend on. They shortened the
formalities. They opened the doors as wide as they could. And never
once when I had gained a foothold did I find that anybody remembered
I was not English; or remembered it to my disadvantage."
Taking his place as he did at the very head, he was a memorable
illustration of Daniel Webster's well-known reply to the young lawyer
who asked him if the profession was not overcrowded:
"There is always room at the top."
Mr. Benjamin passed swiftly from penury to affluence. He told me
once what his highest earnings in any one year had been. The amount
was larger by many thousands of pounds than the income of his chief
competitor. It was larger, I think, than any English lawyer now
makes except {368} at the Parliamentary Bar, where the figures are
almost fantastic. This is a money test but apply any other you like
and you would still see the figure of Mr. Benjamin standing out from
among the crowd and high above it; and above even the highest of that
day.
I dined lately at the Inner Temple as the guest of a great and
successful lawyer. There was a company of other successful lawyers
and of judges. I asked a question or two about Benjamin. In that
perfectly rarefied legal atmosphere there could be none but a purely
legal opinion. And there was but one opinion. Most of these men had
known him, though Benjamin died in 1884. Whether they knew him or
not they knew all about him. His greatness was admitted. Eulogies
were poured out on him.
"Did his American nationality hinder him?"
"It neither hindered nor helped. He was at the English Bar and that
was enough."
I come back to Sir Francis Jeune. He was the friend and legal
adviser of Lord Beaconsfield, whose will he drew. A Conservative, of
course. His practice at the Bar was never of a showy kind. But if
you put yourself into his hands you felt sure he would do the right
and wise thing. His mind was of the sort known as legal. When he
came to the Bench it was seen to be judicial also. I suppose the
general public has never understood why Probate, Divorce, and
Admiralty should be united in one division of the Supreme Court. No
two subjects could be more unlike {369} than Divorce and Admiralty.
But a judge is supposed to have taken all legal knowledge to be his
province, and to be equally capable of dealing with all the mysteries
of the law in all its relations to all parts of life. It is true
that on the Admiralty side assessors are called in. An assessor is a
kind of expert. A retired sea-captain, for example, who has never
commanded anything but a sailing ship, is supposed to be competent to
advise on the most intricate questions of modern steamship
navigation. The result is sometimes astounding, as in the case of
the _Campania_, condemned by Mr. Justice Gorell Barnes to pay for the
loss of the bark _Embolton_, by collision, solely because she was
steaming nine knots. It was proved that this was the safest speed
for her and for all comers; that she was under better control at nine
knots than at any less speed. But the court said: "If people will
build ships which are safest at nine knots they must be responsible
for the consequences."
Sir Francis Jeune had no part in the trial of this famous cause and I
am sure had too much sense to agree with the judgment. Good sense
was, perhaps, the predominant trait in his character. He showed it
pre-eminently in the Divorce Court. There he was helped, no doubt,
by his social experiences. He knew London as few men know it. He
had, in such matters, almost feminine instincts. But he ruled in his
court as all strong English judges rule, and as strong American
judges do not. In America we say of an advocate: "He tried such and
such a case." In England the phrase is {370} never used of the
barrister. It is the judge who "tries" the cause, as it ought to be.
Sir Francis "tried" the causes that came before him. He knew the
law. He mastered facts easily. He was not easily misled and he had
the sagacity which led him quickly to right conclusions. Since his
death there have been contrasts on which I will not dwell.
{371}