The Bar is a very generous place. A few weeks ago I came to be in a case, pro bono. My junior had no ego. It was a case of some considerable legal importance, raising huge issues of principle. He is a superb lawyer, and a powerful advocate, yet he warmly welcomed me.
Then I contacted another junior, who has a towering reputation in this recondite area of law. He joined our team, pro bono, with alacrity. We all worked as a team. We supported each other, and discussed contentious issues re strategy with mutual respect.
Our wonderful instructing solicitor was delighted by our esprit de corps. Eventually, our pro bono representation was found to be remunerable, but we had all been prepared to work for nothing. We welcomed the opportunity to use what talent we had in defence of a worthy client.
A few years ago I saw that a legal commentator on this site had styled himself as a literary expert on a certain author, then being studied by my eldest son. I contacted the supposed Harold Bloom, latter day Leavis, to see if he might be willing to discuss the author with my boy
Knowing the Bar’s generosity, I thought he’d be delighted. I was surprised to see him tweeting about it, knowing I was his follower. He was, apparently, quite affronted.
He thought he should charge me. His loyal followers agreed. I ignored and pretended not to have read these mutterings. He reflected, & thought personal enrichment wouldn’t be right- the money should go to charity. When the subject was broached, by him, I was prepared.
I was then on the Board of two charities (now only one). I was of course happy to make a substantial donation to them both in return for one hour of the alleged critic’s valuable time.
My son, however, had other ideas. He was incensed by what he read - the gloating, superior, and bad mannered tweets, published by this wannabe Tynan, and vetoed the idea. I would do anything for my son, and was prepared to suffer a little humiliation for his sake.
My son wouldn’t countenance it. He didn’t want to receive anything from a man who showed such little respect to his dad. And so ended this episode. The literary prowess of my erstwhile correspondent no longer appears on his profile.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In the 1790s an authoritarian Government led by Pitt the Younger brought a series of treason trials against radicals who were accused of ‘Jacobinism’. Mild mannered individuals faced a grisly public execution.
Some defended themselves ably and well, but for the majority their deliverance depended on Thomas Erskine and his junior, Vicary Gibbs.
Erskine forfeited his office as personal attorney to the Prince of Wales to defend these so called traitors. He asserted his independence, and thus the independence of the Bar.
#Christmas I once met a man who’d killed someone, when he was still very young. He wasn’t released from prison until he was in his fifties, many years beyond his tariff. The problem was, prison exacerbated his anger.
He was, it seemed, a hopeless case. Parole hearings came and went, and he was adjudged to be a danger
That he was released at all was a miracle. But something happened. He started to stitch. The charity that enabled him to do this was @finecellwork
I was in CACD the other day. The usual. What seemed a pretty obvious and just outcome, almost became a Swiftian nightmare - in which ‘words [ were ]multiplied for the purpose, that white is black, and black is white.’ (Thread)
Then again, I couldn’t have done it without the power of example. When we fight for the liberty of the subject, we have a rich lineage of what advocates have done before us.