The certificate signed by me, the day before, was produced by Stubbs. I admitted it to be mine, and explained the circumstances under which I gave it. It seems that Crewkman and his traveller were involved in litigation, on this very agreement: the one contended that it amounted to a partnership, and claimed an. account of profits: Crewkman denied the partnership. Stubbs had advised him that he was wrong, and recommended a compromise. Distrusting Stubbs, he had come to ask my opinion, without ever calling my attention to the real point at issue. He took the opinion to Stubbs to challenge him with ignorance; and then to his traveller, to impress on him the hopelessness of his suit, and work him into a compromise. I do not now recollect how the matter terminated.

I have often known this underhanded dealing practiced by men who think themselves wiser than their solicitors; and in most cases, they bring their own punishment, in getting conflicting advice, by submitting one state of facts to one attorney, and another to another; unconscious themselves of the importance of minute accuracy, they report these contradic

tory opinions to their friends, as edifying illus. trations of the "glorious uncertainty of the law!" There is, however, another less frequent, but more galling way of testing their adviser's judgment; more galling, because it implies a doubt of his honesty of purpose. I have had a client consulting me very gravely on his case, and after I had given it the closest attention, and reluctantly told him that I thought him wrong, he has fairly turned on me, with the laughing avowal that he had deceived me, and reversed his position, being the intended plaintiff, and not defendant, in the matter; that he wanted to be sure that he was right, and had therefore misrepresented his position in the dispute! A cautious man will not always, nor often suspect, but he will always be prepared againts traps laid for him by his own client.

The mention of this habit of appealing from one solicitor to another, without fairly apprising either party of the fact, recalls to my mind an affair of earlier days that may teach my readers to avoid, as much as possible, another class of clients whom I shall designate as the indiscreet. In a certain sense, all clients except those who come to you on "preventive duty,"

to be protected against anticipated risk, are indiscreet; and it is to repair their indiscretion, that your aid is wanted: but there are some instances, in which it is difficult for an attorney, at least a very young one, to avoid involving himself in the folly of his client; any man, however, might innocently have got into the following scrape, whether professional or not.

CHAPTER IX.

"Quomodo ergo id quod fit cæco casu et volubilitate fortunæ præsentiri potest?"-Cic. de Div.

WHILE my thoughts were yet but little occupied with the cares of business (and alas! I was full thirty ere business had much to do with them), I used to ramble about at parties and soirees, in the certainty of finding amusement, if I did not find clients. On one of these occasions, I fell into company with a very agreeable lady of four-and-twenty. I knew that she was engaged, and shortly to be married: hence love had nothing to do with it; but I played the agreeable so delightfully, that the fair creature, knowing I was a "lawyer," as they are all pleased to call us, told me she wanted to consult me about her affairs. It is of little use preaching about it: I am going to read a very instructive lesson;

and yet I am

She

quite certain that there is not one of my readers to be found, under seven or eight-and- twenty, who will not as assuredly as I did, fall into the same error, if he has the opportunity. declared that she was serious; it is quite impossible to advise while one is waltzing— the head is too giddy, to say nothing of other enchantments; so I invited her to call on me the following day. She came, chaperoned by the lady at whose house she was staying, and who was as young and yet prettier than herself. I must give her name a nom de guerre, and I will call her Mrs. Chartres. My fair client's object was bona file to ask me her own position in respect of some proceedings in an amicable suit, in which all her family were involved, but which as they supposed, was conducted by the family solicitor with somewhat less activity than was desirable. I think she called on me twice after this. It is very many years ago, and I cannot exactly remember how many times we met; but it was sufficiently often to make me familiar with the nature and position of her property. About six weeks after our first interview, I received a very singular note from her. She resided ten miles from town,