2 books; one of them was red, the other blue. The visitor did not stop in the next room. (30) The whole incident occupied 3 minutes.

On the basis of points, a valuation was made of testimonial correctness and of verdict correctness. The accounts are here much abbreviated for the former.]

I. Testimonial Correctness. (1) Description of the visitor's person. The average correctness of the testimony was 80.6 per cent; for the men, 84.2 per cent; for the women, 76 per cent. The best single testimony reached 100 per cent, by a man; the best by a woman was 90.5 per cent. The poorest by a woman was 37.5 per cent; by a man 73.3 per cent. . . . (2) Description of the action of the parties. The average correctness of the testimony was 79.7 per cent; for the men, 80.8 per cent; for the women, 78.9 per cent. The best single testimony reached 96.2 per cent, by a woman; the best by a man was 85.7 per cent. The poorest by a woman was 60 per cent; by a man, 71 per cent.

(3) Thus the averages for the whole incident were: men, 81.8 per cent; women, 78.4 per cent; total persons, 79.9 per cent. The best single testimony averaged: a man, 87.8 per cent; a woman, 94.6 per cent. The poorest averaged: a man, 77.5 per cent; a woman, 58.7 per cent.

II. Verdict Correctness. The written testimonial reports were submitted separately to T, a lawyer, and D, an assistant judge, with the request to make special findings on the facts of the incident as therein disclosed. Their finding was valued by the same system of points used in valuing the testimony. result was as follows:

The

(1) Description of the visitor's person. It is pleasing to note that, in spite of the great differences of correctness in the individual testimonies, a correct finding was made. Both jurors made a finding 100 per

cent correct (though the average for the testimony was only 80.6 per cent)..

T

(2) Description of the action of the parties. Here the finding of Ť was 86.5 per cent correct, and that of D 82.4 correct (the witnesses averaging only 79.7 per cent).

T's narrative reconstruction was as follows: "The visitor, who exhibited some restlessness, handed to the lecturer a sealed letter, with some such remark as 'Excuse me.' The lecturer opened the letter and read it, exhibiting some marks of emotion. The lecturer had risen from his chair and stood in front of it while reading, and then stuck the letter in his pocket and continued his lecture; the statement of one of the witnesses that the lecturer laid the letter on his desk is contradicted by the other witnesses and appears to be an error. The visitor took a seat without further remark, and the lecturer while reading the letter stood at a table to the left of the desk. On the table were some books (how many the witnesses do not agree), of which the visitor turned the leaves. He then asked the lecturer's permission to take one of the books, and went off after getting this permission. Whether he took one or two books was not clearly proved." Here we observe an error of half a point in finding “Excuse me" as the visitor's second remark. The actual words were: "I have here a letter to be handed to you." How T could make such a finding is inexplicable; for five of the witnesses testified that the visitor said nothing, four that they did not know whether he said anything, and one that he had said something which the witness could not recall. T's second error is interesting, in that he refused to trust the one witness who was right in saying that the lecturer placed the letter on the table. On the most important item in the whole experiment, viz. how many books the visitor took off with him, T's report is that the

visitor asked permission for one book only, but that the number actually taken is doubtful. Yet a comparison of the testimonies reveals the curious fact that there was no basis for this discrimination on his part; the witnesses differed no less radically on the one item than on the other.

D's narrative reconstruction was as follows: "The visitor knocked, entered, and asked if he might speak with Mr. X. The lecturer said that he was that person; whereon the visitor entered and handed over the letter. The lecturer took it, cut it open, and read it, after asking the audience to excuse him and requesting the visitor to take a seat. The visitor remained standing a moment, then approached the table, on which lay 4 books, and asked if he might look at them; and on being told Certainly,' he sat down at the table and turned over the pages. The lecturer meanwhile read the letter, glancing occasionally at the visitor. While reading, the lecturer was noticeably pale. After finishing its perusal, he stuck it in his pocket and went on with the lecture. The visitor continued reading a short while; then he asked permission to take away to the next room two books, which he had been

looking at. Permission was granted, and the visitor then went out, carrying his cane and the two books." D reports that the visitor knocked before entering; here he was incorrect, but followed the majority of the testimonies. A more important point is his finding that the visitor asked "if he might speak with Mr. X." The actual words were: "Excuse me, Mr. G, may I speak with you a moment?" This part of D's finding, covering both remarks of the visitor, was debited with two errors. D also erroneously found that the lecturer put the letter, after reading it, into his pocket. Moreover, he makes the error of finding that the visitor, not only took off, but asked consent to take, two books.

(3) On the whole incident, the percentage of correctness for T's finding was 90.6 (24 correct points, and 2 incorrect), and for D's finding 87.4 (41 correct and 6 incorrect); the two averaging 88.5. The average correctness of the testimonies, 79.9 per cent, was thus 10.7 per cent below T, and 7.5 per cent below D. Put in another way, the average percentage of error in the testimonies was about twice as great as in the findings. . . .

April 11, 1905. A. The Dramatic Incident as agreed upon beforehand. [The scene is an ordinary lecture room, about 30'x60', having 10 rows of narrow note-tables, with 2 seats at each; there are in each row 4 tables, each 3' long, with 2 aisles between. The floor is tiered, rising 10' at the back. The four student participants sit near together in the 7th and 8th rows. The lecturer is on a small raised

platform at the front. About 60 students are in the class.] The lecturer will open the lecture by saying: "Mr. Candee, please state Mr. the case of Smith v. Jones." Candee will say nothing; but Mr. Brothers will slowly and promptly say, "Mr. Stowe is a cad, and I can prove it." Mr. Stowe will then rise and shout, "That is an insult, and I shall here resent it." Then Mr. Candee will strike the table

with two sticks, immediately and very loud. Mr. Dickinson will then promptly rise, turn, and throw a book at the door of Mr. Woodward's office, next south of the lecture room; immediately Mr. Brothers will start forward across the benches to grapple with Mr. Stowe. Mr. Candee will try to hold back Mr. Brothers, Mr. Stowe will start towards Mr. Brothers, and Mr. Dickinson will try to hold back Mr. Stowe. Messrs. Stowe and Brothers will not touch. All will make as much noise as possible. In the meantime Mr. Crossley, in Mr. Woodward's room at the rear of the lecture room, will break a piece of glass, enter the lecture room from Mr. Woodward's door, and exclaim, "Who broke my window?" Then the lecturer will pound on the desk with a stick; and all will stop.

B. The Testimony. [Immediately an adjournment took place to the school court room; a jury of six was in waiting, selected from members of other law classes. Thirteen witnesses were arbitrarily selected from those present at the drama. The following questions were put to each: 1. What was the first incident? 2. Who spoke first? 3. What did he say? 4. Who spoke next? 5. What did he say?

6. Who first used any weapon or missile, and of what sort?

7. Who was struck or assailed with it?

8. Who else participated, and what did he do?

9. Who else was struck or injured by any one?

The stenographic report of the answers was as follows:]

Answers.

First Witness, Mr. Krause (who sat four or five rows in front of the actors).

1. I turned around and saw Mr. Brothers on top of two other gentlemen.

2. I don't remember, I could not distinguish whose voice it was. I heard somebody hallo "Scab."

3. I don't remember.
4. I don't remember.
5. I don't remember.
6. I did not see any weapon.
7. I did not see anybody.

8. When the noise was at its height, I saw Mr. Crossley put his head through the rear door. 9. I don't know.

Second Witness, Mr. Thomason. 1. I turned round and saw Mr. Candee move towards Mr. Stowe and Mr. Dickinson.

2. Mr. Candee.

3. Mr. Stowe is a cad and I can prove it.

4. I don't know.
5. I don't know.
6. I didn't see any.
7. I didn't see any.

8. I saw Mr. Crossley, and heard, at the same time I saw him, the crash of some glass.

9. I did not see any one else.

Third Witness, Mr. Moore (who sat about two rows in front and to the right of the actors).

1. I looked back of me and saw Mr. Candee, who seemed to be holding some one. They had their arms around each other. I think Mr. Brothers was one.

2. I don't know.

3. Mr. Somebody is a cad and I can prove it; but I did not hear the

name.

4. I don't know.

5. I don't know.

6. I didn't see any weapon.

7. I don't know.

8. My attention was called to the front of the room, and I did not see anything else after that.

9. I don't know.

Fourth Witness, Mr. Gannon (who sat straight in front of the actors).

1. I heard some noise and looked around, and several of the men were in a scuffle, and I heard a crash of glass.

2. I do not remember who spoke first.

3. I did not distinguish any speech.

8. I saw no one in connection with it until the affray was over. Then I saw Mr. Dickinson. I saw no one participating, when I saw him.

9. I saw Mr. Candee force Mr. Brothers down in the seat.

Seventh Witness, Mr. Nordhold (who was sitting four or five rows in front of the actors).

1. I saw Mr. Brothers.

2. I do not know who was the

first one to speak.

3. Mr. Stowe is a cat.

4. I do not remember.

5. I do not know.

6. I do not know of any. 7. I do not know of any. 8. Mr. Candee was wrestling with Mr. Brothers. Mr. Stowe among the rest of them. He came

was

1. I heard Mr. Brothers say to Mr. Stowe, "You are a cad." Mr. Brothers had something in his hand. Mr. Stowe jumped up from his seat. 2. Mr. Brothers.

3. Mr. Stowe, you are a cad and I can prove it.

4. I saw Mr. Stowe get up.

5. I do not know.

6. I did not see any weapon or missile.

7. I saw none.

8. I saw Mr. Candee and Mr. Dickinson appear to be holding Mr. Brothers to keep him away from Mr. Stowe.

9. I did not see him do anything but jump up.

Tenth Witness, Mr. Haight (who sat about 15 feet from the actors, to the left and in front).

1. The first I saw was that Mr. Otjen and Mr. Brothers were standing up in the rear of the room.

2. Mr. Wigmore was the first one to speak.

3. Mr. Stowe, will you state the case of Smith v. Jones?

4. I am not positive, but I think Mr. Brothers did not.

5. Stowe is a cad.

6. I did not see any weapon or missile used and did not hear any, but I heard some glass fall.

7. I did not see any one struck or assailed.

8. I saw Mr. Candee and Mr. Stowe.

9. No one that I saw. Eleventh SteinWitness, Mr. brecher (who was sitting in the same row with Mr. Brothers, to the left across the aisle).

1. I heard Mr. Wigmore call on Mr. Candee for a case.

2. Then Mr. Brothers said, You are a cat.

3. As above.

4. I heard no one speak afterwards.

5. Nothing.

6. Mr. Dickinson jumped forward slightly, and it was a yellow brown book which Mr. Dickinson aimed at Mr. Brothers, and just at that moment there followed a crash.

7. No one was struck. I saw the book thrown, but did not see the result, until Mr. Crossley opened the door and said, "Who struck at my window?"

8. As above. 9. I saw no particular person struck or injured.

Twelfth Witness, Mr. Romans (who was sitting two rows ahead, next to the wall on the left).

1. I heard the declaration and immediately turned around.

2. Mr. Candee started to state his case.

3. I don't know.

4. Mr. Brothers.

5. He shook Mr. Stowe and said, Stowe, you are a cad.

6. I was impressed with the fact that Mr. Dickinson stuck a small parcel at Mr. Candee. I do not know whether it left his hand or not. 7. Mr. Candee.

5. I did not distinguish anything else.

6. Mr. Dickinson threw a book. 7. I don't think any one was struck. It was aimed at Mr. Candee, but did not strike any one.

8. I did not see it hit any one. 9. No one else was struck or injured.

66

C. The Verdict of the Jury. [The jurors then retired, without the stenographic report, and after deliberation, brought in the following verdict:] Mr. Wigmore called on Mr. Candee for a case. Mr. Brothers created a disturbance by rising and calling Mr. Stowe a cad, saying, Mr. Stowe is a cad and I can prove it." Mr. Stowe started towards Mr. Brothers. Mr. Candee took hold of Mr. Brothers and tried to hold him down. Mr. Dickinson threw a book at Mr. Candee and missed him, and it lit near the window. There was a crash, as though the book went through the window, but it did not. Nobody was hit and nobody injured.

Mr. Crossley put his head in at the back door, and said, "Who threw at my window?" Mr. Wigmore struck the desk with a shingle. (Signed.)

C. W. W. Whitcomb, Foreman ; Geo. A. Finley, C. C. Colton, Frederick Secord, J. A. Bugee, W.