ast, of the New York bar dared to defy and to denounce
injustice, even when clad in ermine.

"Another instance of his intrepidity before a judge was in the Busteed
case. The judge had threatened to convict him for contempt. Busteed had
apologized, and Brady also, with his matchless grace and courtesy, had
tendered Busteed's apology; but the judge still said that he should
send him to prison. 'You will, will you?' said Brady; 'I say you will
not.' And, citing authority after authority against his power to do so,
he dared him to thus stretch his prerogative. The judge thought best to
excuse Mr. Busteed."

Perhaps one of the best instances of his moral courage to be found was
his conduct with reference to the late Edwin M. Stanton. He was
associated with Mr. Stan ton in the Sickles trial, and conceived a warm
personal attachment to him. Mr. Brady remained a Democrat to the last,
and was an active member of Tammany Hall. Upon one occasion, during a
meeting of the Tammany Committee, when the name of Stanton was received
with hisses and yells of objurgation, Brady rose, and facing the crowd
told them "that he knew they hated Edwin M. Stanton, but he, a Democrat,
knew him, and held him in his heart of hearts." It was a bold
declaration, considering the time and place, even for one so highly
esteemed as James T. Brady.

As before remarked, Mr. Brady never relied upon his eloquence alone for
success at the bar. He had a profound respect for his profession, and
scorned its trickeries. He worked faithfully over the cases intrusted to
him, studied them carefully, and never brought them to trial till he was
thorough master of the law bearing upon them. This enabled him
frequently to present issues which a less learned man would not have
dreamed of. When he was retained as counsel for Huntington the forger,
he conceived the idea that the man was morally unaccountable for his
deed, and his theory of moral insanity, as developed by him in this
case, is one of the most powerful arguments upon the subject to be found
in any language. He read every thing he could find on the subject of
insanity, and when he went into court there was not a physician in the
land better informed with respect to it than he. The cases in which he
was frequently engaged required an unusual acquaintance with medical
jurisprudence, and he was regarded as one of the best authorities on the
subject in the country.

His power over a jury was remarkable. He never