a will, the plaintiff arguing that the
signature has been forged. Experts in chirography are called by both
sides. It is manifest, as Mr. Bliss has said, that the opinions of
experts will be sought by the contending counsel, and at the trial we
would have those favoring the theory, forgery, testifying to that
effect, whilst the others would support the genuineness of the
signature. Undoubtedly, also, had either of these gentlemen expressed
a different opinion prior to the trial, he would have been found upon
the opposite side. Or, in plainer words, the men are hired to testify,
because, previous to the trial, they hold an opinion favorable to the
side which pays them. Thus, as has been shown to you at some length,
eminent jurists now accord but cautious credence to expert testimony,
because of the bias which must attend paid advocacy. But, gentlemen of
the jury, as logical as all this is, when applied to a civil suit, it
becomes but the most specious reasoning when introduced into a
criminal case, such as this.

"We are often led astray by arguments, which contain analogies which
are but apparently analogous. In this case there is a flaw at the very
root of the argument, and therefore the very flower and fruit of the
whole beautiful array of words must wilt and fail.

"This flaw is easily pointed out. In the civil case, as I have said,
and as you know, opposing counsel defend but the side that pays them.
In a criminal case it is entirely different. The District Attorney is
engaged, not for a special case, against a special prisoner, but by
the whole community, for the protection of all the people. Now the
prisoner is himself one of these, and his rights are ever in the minds
of the very men who prepare the arguments against him. Let us glance
for a moment at the _modus operandi_. Suspicion is aroused against a
man. If sufficiently grave, the first bits of evidence attainable are
presented to the Grand Jury, and perhaps they find an indictment. This
gives the State authority to hold the prisoner by arrest, until such
time when he may be tried. But, gentlemen of the jury, are all
indicted men tried? Not at all. The District Attorney not
infrequently, in the course of preparing a case, finds that an error
has been made: that the man is the victim of circumstances: in short
that he is innocent. What occurs then? Does he act the part of the
hired lawyer and proceed, merely that he may collect a fee? Not at
all. He protect