lore than by their fears of a loss of popularity as a result of too
definite charges in civil suits, or too great severity in criminal
cases. They grew very dexterous in avoiding any commitment as to the
legal or moral bearings of the questions brought before them. They
generally refused to sum up, or to comment upon evidence; when asked
by the counsel to give instructions they would say, "Why, gentlemen,
the jury understand this case as well as you or I. They will do
justice between the parties." One famous judge, who was afterwards
governor, when sentencing a murderer, impressed it upon his mind, and
wished him to inform his friends, that it was the jury and not the
judge who had found him guilty, and then asked him on what day he
would like to be hanged. It is needless to say that the bench and bar
were not all of this class. There were even at that early day lawyers,
and not a few, who had already won reputation in the older States, and
whose names are still honored in the profession. Cook, McLean,
Edwards, Kane, Thomas, Reynolds, and others, the earliest lawyers of
the State, have hardly been since surpassed for learning and ability.

[Sidenote: Ford, "History of Illinois," p. 31.]

[Sidenote: Ford, p. 81.]

In a community where the principal men were lawyers, where there was
as yet little commerce, and industrial enterprise was unknown, it was
natural that one of the chief interests of life should be the pursuit
of politics. The young State swarmed with politicians; they could be
found chewing and whittling at every cross-roads inn; they were busy
at every horse-race, arranging their plans and extending their
acquaintance; around the burgoo-pot of the hunting party they
discussed measures and candidates; they even invaded the camp-meeting