“The First Rumpole Omnibus” John Mortimer

I vaguely remember reading something by John Mortimer book in 1978 when I was in college. I don’t remember what it was, but it wasn’t Rumpole. If I had known at the time that John Mortimer wrote about Rumpole, I would have jumped at the chance to read them, because they are mix of humor and courtroom tactics that I would have liked. I just checked the dates of publication for the first omnibus, and they run from 1978-1980, so these books would have been in their first hardback editions, definitely not within my price range in the late ‘70s. An aside about missed opportunities: sometimes I am appalled that I never spent time exploring the library in undergraduate school. There was so much there that I would have liked, but I suspect that I was still wrapped up in the high school social need and wanted to spend time with people as much as possible. Spending time at the library would have declared my geekiness too early in my life. I read back then, but mostly I read from my mother’s library that was populated with courtroom dramas (e.g., “QB VII”) and mystery novels (e.g., books by Ed McBain), especially religious-based authors (e.g., William X. Kienzle). This raises the nurture/nature question: do I like the books I do because of a natural predisposition or was I trained that way by reading what my parents read?

The first Rumpole omnibus contains the books “Rumpole of the Bailey,” “The Trials of Rumpole” and “Rumpole’s Return.” These are the books in which we are introduced to the chambers, some perennial clients and She Who Must Be Obeyed. We learn that Rumpole wisely never asks his clients whether they committed the crimes or not, and that he is an expert on blood, but not in the way of modern forensics. The characters presented by Mortimer are all flawed in some way, and because of this, I think of the Rumpole stories as a counterpoint to Perry Mason, where all the clients are innocent and everyone in the office gets along famously. Rumpole is at odds with almost everyone except Phyllida Erskine-Brown, who defends him on all points, his clients are rarely innocent and he doesn’t always win his cases.

Rummaging around the internet for information on Rumpole I discovered that the books are based on the television series (a spin-off, so to speak). I find that somewhat disappointing and am surprised that I have never seen any of the shows. I am sure that if I had run across any of them on PBS I would have jumped at the chance to see it. However, I have my own mental image of Horace Rumpole and colleagues and would have probably just thought they had got it all wrong. My image is based on the movie “Witness for the Prosecution,” and I see Charles Laughton playing Rumpole. The romp through the internet also confirmed my suspicions about the books, and that is there is no coherent timeline for Rumpole’s life and back story. I have not read the books in order, but it appears that is not a problem, because the events do not appear in order. This first omnibus of Rumpole’s trials, and tribulations, are based on the first two seasons of the television series and a television special, which explains why the first two books are short stories and the last one a novel. Even though these are the first stories, he retires twice and returns to work twice during this work and is already at an advanced age, presumably 68. Yet, there are thirteen more books to follow. The one of the latest books tells the story of one of Rumpole’s earliest cases, the Penge Bungalow Murder.

I remember enjoying the Rumpole books I had read in the past, and so I purchased the first three omnibuses of these stories. While I have enjoyed the first of them, I’m not eager to read the next right away. I think I’ll save them for a rainy day in the future. A cozy fire, a hot cup of tea and a day of chuckling over how he wins his cases sounds like a good plan, just not right now.