There were several celebrated men on the Home Circuit when I joined.  Amongst them were Thesiger and Platt.

This was long before the former became Attorney-General, which took place in 1858.  He afterwards was Lord Chancellor, and took his title from the little county town where probably he obtained his start in the career which ended so brilliantly.

Platt became a Baron of the Exchequer.

Thesiger was a first-rate advocate, and, I need not say, was at all times scrupulously fair.  He had a high sense of honour, and was replete with a quiet, subtle humour, which seemed to come upon you unawares, and, like all true humour, derived no little of its pleasure from its surprise.  In addition to his abilities, Thesiger was ever kind-hearted and gentle, especially in his manner towards juniors.  I know that he sympathized with them, and helped them whenever he had an opportunity.  It did not fall to my lot to hold many briefs with him, but I am glad to say that I had some, because I shall not forget the kindness and instruction I received from him.

Platt was an advocate of a different stamp.  He also was kind, and in every way worthy of grateful remembrance.  He loved to amuse especially the junior Bar, and more particularly in court.  He was a good natural punster, and endowed with a lively wit.  The circuit was never dull when Platt was present; but there was one trait in his character as an advocate that judges always profess to disapprove of—­he loved popular applause, and his singularly bold and curious mode of cross-examination sometimes brought him both rebuke and hearty laughter from the most austere of judges.

He dealt with a witness as though the witness was putty, moulding him into any grotesque form that suited his humour.  No evidence could preserve its original shape after Platt had done with it.  He had a coaxing manner, so much so that a witness would often be led to say what he never intended, and what afterwards he could not believe he had uttered.

Thesiger, who was his constant opponent, was sometimes irritated with Platt’s manner, and on the occasion I am about to mention fairly lost his temper.

It was in an action for nuisance before Tindal, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, at Croydon Assizes.

Thesiger was for the plaintiff, who complained of a nuisance caused by the bad smells that emanated from a certain tank on the defendant’s premises, and called a very respectable but ignorant labouring man to prove his case.

The witness gave a description of the tank, not picturesque, but doubtless true, and into this tank all kinds of refuse seem to have been thrown, so that the vilest of foul stenches were emitted.

Platt began his cross-examination of poor Hodge by asking him in his most coaxing manner to describe the character and nature of the various stenches.  Had Hodge been scientific, or if he had had a little common sense, he would have simply answered “bad character and ill-nature;” but he improved on this simplicity, and said,—­