Ascending a flight of steps I found myself in the hall of justice, in the presence of the magistrates and amidst a great many people, amongst whom I observed my friend the attorney and his client. The magistrates, upon the whole, were rather a fine body of men. Lord V- was in the chair, a highly intelligent-looking person, with fresh complexion, hooked nose, and dark hair. A policeman very civilly procured me a commodious seat. I had scarcely taken possession of it when the poaching case was brought forward. The first witness against the accused was a fellow dressed in a dirty snuff-coloured suit, with a debauched look, and having much the appearance of a town shack. He deposed that he was a hired keeper, and went with another to watch the river at about four o'clock in the morning; that they placed themselves behind a bush, and that a little before day-light they saw the farmer drive some cattle across the river. He was attended by a dog. Suddenly they saw him put a spear upon a stick which he had in his hand, run back to the river, and plunging the spear in, after a struggle, pull out a salmon; that they then ran forward, and he himself asked the farmer what he was doing, whereupon the farmer flung the salmon and spear into the river and said that if he did not take himself off he would fling him in too. The attorney then got up and began to cross-question him. "How long have you been a keeper?""About a fortnight."
"What do you get a week?"
"Ten shillings."
"Have you not lately been in London?"
"I have."
"What induced you to go to London?"
"The hope of bettering my condition."
"Were you not driven out of Machynlleth?""I was not."
"Why did you leave London?"
"Because I could get no work, and my wife did not like the place.""Did you obtain possession of the salmon and the spear?""I did not."
"Why didn't you?"
"The pool was deep where the salmon was struck, and I was not going to lose my life by going into it.""How deep was it?"
"Over the tops of the houses," said the fellow, lifting up his hands.
The other keeper then came forward; he was brother to the former, but had much more the appearance of a keeper, being rather a fine fellow, and dressed in a wholesome, well-worn suit of velveteen.
He had no English, and what he said was translated by a sworn interpreter. He gave the same evidence as his brother about watching behind the bush, and seeing the farmer strike a salmon.
When cross-questioned, however, he said that no words passed between the farmer and his brother, at least, that he heard. The evidence for the prosecution being given, my friend the attorney entered upon the defence. He said that he hoped the court were not going to convict his client, one of the most respectable farmers in the county, on the evidence of two such fellows as the keepers, one of whom was a well-known bad one, who for his evil deeds had been driven from Machynlleth to London, and from London back again to Machynlleth, and the other, who was his brother, a fellow not much better, and who, moreover, could not speak a word of English - the honest lawyer forgetting no doubt that his own client had just as little English as the keeper. He repeated that he hoped the court would not convict his respectable client on the evidence of these fellows, more especially as they flatly contradicted each other in one material point, one saying that words had passed between the farmer and himself, and the other that no words at all had passed, and were unable to corroborate their testimony by anything visible or tangible. If his client speared the salmon and then flung the salmon with the spear sticking in its body into the pool, why didn't they go into the pool and recover the spear and salmon?
They might have done so with perfect safety, there being an old proverb - he need not repeat it - which would have secured them from drowning had the pool been not merely over the tops of the houses but over the tops of the steeples. But he would waive all the advantage which his client derived from the evil character of the witnesses, the discrepancy of their evidence, and their not producing the spear and salmon in court. He would rest the issue of the affair with confidence, on one argument, on one question; it was this. Would any man in his senses - and it was well known that his client was a very sensible man - spear a salmon not his own when he saw two keepers close at hand watching him - staring at him? Here the chairman observed that there was no proof that he saw them - that they were behind a bush. But my friend the attorney very properly, having the interest of his client and his own character for consistency in view, stuck to what he had said, and insisted that the farmer must have seen them, and he went on reiterating that he must have seen them, notwithstanding that several magistrates shook their heads.
Just as he was about to sit down I moved up behind him and whispered: "Why don't you mention the dog? Wouldn't the dog have been likely to have scented the fellows out even if they had been behind the bush?"He looked at me for a moment and then said with a kind of sigh:
"No, no! twenty dogs would be of no use here. It's no go - I shall leave the case as it is."The court was cleared for a time, and when the audience were again admitted Lord V- said that the Bench found the prisoner guilty;that they had taken into consideration what his counsel had said in his defence, but that they could come to no other conclusion, more especially as the accused was known to have been frequently guilty of similar offences. They fined him four pounds, including costs.
As the people were going out I said to the farmer in Welsh: "A bad affair this.""Drwg iawn" - very bad indeed, he replied.
"Did these fellows speak truth?" said I.
"Nage - Dim ond celwydd" - not they! nothing but lies.
"Dear me!" said I to myself, "what an ill-treated individual!"