“The doctor followed him into a private room, when the mayor said: ‘Doctor, what do you know about those three children?’
“‘I know enough to convince me that the boys are heroes, and that the girl is a lovely little heroine. I know that they are friendless orphans, which should entitle them to the sympathies of all good men. I know that any one who would oppress or wrong them ought to go to the ----’
“‘Yes, yes, I know, doctor; I’ll discharge them at once.’
“‘You should never have molested them at first. What business had that Bowles boy at their camp, I should like to know? You knew that he was the meanest, most unprincipled boy in this county, and I am surprised that you should so far have forgotten yourself as to have those poor helpless children dragged into court as if they were thieves. Now that’s what I think of the whole business. You go in there and discharge those children immediately, else we are enemies for life.’
“‘Oh, my dear doctor, I beseech you, don’t for a moment imagine that I would oppress the orphans, or deal harshly with the helpless. I was going to discharge them anyway. I was merely investigating the case for form’s sake. You know one has to appear stern and unbending sometimes, while his heart is melting with pity.’
“‘Yes, I know how it is. I have long been acquainted with the secret goodness of your heart; I wonder how you could keep it smothered so well.’
“‘Ah! doc, one in my position has much to contend with. It’s a difficult thing to hold the scales of justice so as to be impartial. I am not fit to be in office--my heart is too tender; I can’t keep from sympathizing with the weak and helpless, even when they have violated the law. I think I shall resign.’
“‘I would if I were you; your heart is too tender for the place; but let us go in and have the children discharged.’
“The mayor resumed his seat, adjusted his spectacles, and deliberately surveyed the crowd.
“My young friend Wallingford, we have had some difficulty in arriving at a correct conclusion respecting our duty in this case. We have patiently listened to the evidence, pro and con, and find in many respects a great conflict; that is to say, somewhat of a contradiction between the statements made by Mr. Bowles and the evidence given by Miss Wallingford. But I am pleased to be able to say that it is the opinion of the court that no willful perjury has been committed in this case; but the apparent conflict grew out of the confusion caused by the interference of that savage old dog in the little unpleasantness. The court very much regrets that it has no power to imprison dogs, or to impose fines upon them. This is more especially to be regretted in this case, as it is the opinion of the court that the dog is the only MAN to blame in the matter. That being true, and as there is no lawful authority given me to punish the dog as he deserves, I am consequently compelled to dismiss Master Wallingford from custody and tax the corporation with the cost. I would admonish my young friend to endeavor to teach his dog better manners in future, lest he might involve his master in some serious trouble. Adjourn court, Mr. Marshal; and don’t fail to collect the cost in the case of Mrs. Bonds against Judge Bosh.’