This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1887 Excerpt: ...ifow, if it be true that Judge Waugh and John Cornwell met together, either in the presence or in the absence of Mr. Beck, the defendant, and if thev agreed that the judge would furnish for Mr. Beck's benefit $500 for the defined purpose of buying oil for Mr. Beck's benefit, and with the further defined purpose that that purchase should be upon margins, then if this were a felony, Judge Waugh would be an accomplice; if it were a misdemeanor, he would be a principal. That, in a few words, is my view of the law, and that is my reason for instructing you as I have. Whether these instructions be right or wrong it is your duty to accept them as the law, and if we are wrong, the supreme court will, of course, correct the decision. "But you must remember that if Judge Waugh only knew that this was to be a purchase of oil, but did not know how much oil was to be purchased, or, in other words, if he did not know that this was to be a purchase upon margins, then he would not be disqualified from recovering on these notes, and your verdict ought to be for the plaintiff. ISow, how is that? You have heard the testimony of the defendant upon that question, and also the testimony of Mr. Cornwell. Both of them are explicit that this was the arrangement made and entered into between Judge Waugh and Mr. Cornwell. Judge Waugh denies that fact. He and Mr. Beck of course are interested, and that interest goes to the credibility of each, and weighs against it. Whether, notwithstanding the interest Judge Waugh has in this matter, you think that he ought to be believed rather than Mr. Beck and Mr. Cornwell, is for you to determine, and about that I make neither suggestion nor intimation. That burden is upon yourselves. But should you be satisfied that. Mr. Cornwell remembers ...