Clever counsel, of course, habitually make use of all sorts of
appeals to sympathy and prejudice. In one case in New York in
which James W. Osborne appeared as prosecutor the defendant
wore a G.A.R. button. His lawyer managed to get a veteran on
the jury. Mr. Osborne is a native of North Carolina. The
defendant's counsel, to use his own words, "worked the war for
all it was worth," and the defendant lived, bled and died for
his country and over and over again. In summing up the case,
the attorney addressed himself particularly to the veteran on
the back row, and, after referring to numerous imaginary
engagements, exclaimed: "Why, gentlemen, my client was pouring
out his life blood upon the field of battle when the ancestors
of Mr. Osborne were raising their hands against the flag!"
For once Mr. Osborne had no adequate words to reply.

By far the most effective and dangerous "trick" employed by
guilty defendants is the deliberate shouldering of the entire
blame by one of two persons who are indicted together for a
single offence. A common example of this is where two men are
caught at the same time bearing away between them the spoil of
their crime and are jointly indicted for "criminally receiving
stolen property." Both, probably, are "side partners,"
equally guilty, and have burglarized some house or store in
each other's company. They maybe old pals and often have
served time together. They agree to demand separate trials,
and that whoever is convicted first shall assume the entire
responsibility. Accordingly, A. is tried and, in spite of his
asseveration that he is innocent and that the "stuff" was
given him by a strange man, who paid him a dollar to transport
it to a certain place, is properly convicted.* The bargain