In a couple of weeks after they had a stiffer tiff over another non-suit, when this "scene" occurred— J U D G E W I L L I S (vehemently) : " Mr. Barry, you are misleading the Court, sir." Mr. B A R R Y : "Really, your Honor, I a m undeserving of such an imputation being cast upon m e ; and I do not think such language should be used towards m e when I a m only doing m y duty towards m y client." J U D G E W I L L I S : "Your conduct is most disrespectful to the Court. I must and shall be treated with c o m m o n decency." M R . B A R R Y : " The words I used have been wrung from me." J U D G E W I L L I S : " If you do not know how to conduct yourself, I shall be compelled to take steps to prevent you from practising in this Court until you learn to do so. It is not thefirst,second, third, or fourth time you have acted most disrespectfully to the Court, and I shall not allow you or any other person to continue to do so." M R . B A R R Y : " I have only to say that it was not m y intention to mislead the Court." J U D G E W I L L I S : " Sit down, sir, and do not dare to reply upon the Court." Judge Willis never liked the H o n . J. A. Murray, a m e m b e r of the Bar, though he was a very general favourite. T h e latter had taken a trip to Sydney, and it came to the Judge's knowledge that he had been quietly "slating" him at head-quarters; so that thefirsttime Murray showed his nose in Court after, Willis accused him of having m a d e use of a private letter, written to him, which he had shown to the Attorney-General in Sydney. Mr. Murray protested in the most positive language that could be used that his Honor was doing him an injustice. J U D G E W I L L I S : " I declare, on the honour of a Judge, that what you say is not correct." M R . M U R R A Y : " Then I declare, on the honour of a Barrister, that I never did so " J U D G E W I L L I S : " I shall have no more of the gross manner in which you have chosen to contradict me. What I have said was correct, and I •" What his Honor intended to have said will never be m a d e clear, for his utterance was cut short by an officer of the Court putting a quaintly-looking addressed letter into his hand. It was hastily opened and glanced through. The Judge, forgetting all about Murray and the Sydney letter affair, turned every colour of the rainbow, and was near going off in afitof apoplexy, brought on by intense wrath. O n recovering something like consciousness, he informed the audience that the letter was the work of some anonymous villain, and sent to worry him. The writer designated the Judge an " old guy," and promised to have him "burned in effigy like Guy Fawkes, before he left the Province; and when this world was gone, and the next come, the Judge should undergo a real, not mimic ordeal byfire,in that over-heated region, where it was believed the original Guido was roasting." T h e roars of laughter with which this interesting intelligence was received, nearly drove the Judge into a relapse—so, hastily handing the innocent cause of this faux pas to the Crown Prosecutor, with injunctions to be sure and discover the writer, he adjourned the Court and hurried home to Heidelberg. Soon after this, certain irregularities, professional and private, of a Mr. Deane, an Attorney, greatly exercised the mind of the Judge, and one day, from the Bench, he declared that " As to Deane, I have no doubt the mind of that gentleman is in such a state as to incapacitate him for performing any business; but I a m afra.d he has brought it on himself. From having frequently seen him of late, I verily believe Deane is not in his senses." DOSING A DOCTOR.
On the 15th April, 1843, as the Court was sitting in Insolvency, and Mr. J. B. Were examining, Di. Thomson handed a scrap of paper to the witness, which the Judge noticing, he pounced on the poor Doctor in a^ twinkling. H e denounced such conduct as a contempt of Court, and sentenced the Doctor to seven days imprisonment. Whilst Thomson's warrant of committal was being prepared the Judge read the intercepted memo., which simply conveyed the impression on the writer's mind of Were's evidence, whereupon Willis declared such an interference with a witness whilst in the hands of the Court, to be
