arrangements: she had the presence of mind to come to me at my residence, instead of following her husband. I was enabled by means of my own servant's renseignemens below stairs, to trace his steps from the Colonel's house, and, of course, I lost no time in following him to his place of concealment. By my interposition, everything was satisfactorily settled, and, to this hour, there are not, as I believe, twenty individuals out of their respective families, that have even a suspicion of the matter.

I have been the more particular in these details, to show how easily a case may happen in which such affairs get wind, without the least reproach to any of the parties; but still I agree with the world in thinking that in most cases, the carelessness is willful; and hence I infer that it may safely be assumed, that the principals in an intended duel, unless they are juvenile fools who will risk every thing for a little eclat, meet reluctantly, and would gladly not meet at all; nor is this any reproach to them; for a man who could face the cannon's mouth under a sense of duty, may be pardoned, without any slur upon his courage, for entering with nervous apprehension upon an encounter without a tenth

of the danger, where duty and conscience, in spite of all the sophistry of the world, must tell him that he is wrong: not only wrong, but, in some sense, committing the only unpardonable sin.

Acting upon this principle, whenever I have been called upon to interfere in an “awkward case" of this description, whether as a solicitor, or a friend, my first maxim has been to "softsolder" the party into a qualified acknowledgment of error: and this is not difficult, after intimating in the gentlest way, that a meeting is out of the question, measures being ready to prevent it, but that your object is to avoid giving publicity to the disappointment. It is not always possible, I admit, for a second to do this, but it is always possible to the attorney, and generally so to the friend, before he becomes a second. A generous man, moreover, is always ready to acknowledge error: he only hesitates lest it should be thought that he is driven into the acknowledgement by fear. I have then proceeded, careless about any introduction but my own, to the antagonist, and being careful, in the same way, to premise that all my object is to avoid publicity to a necessary interruption of

the ceremony, I have succeeded with him with as little difficulty as with the other; a due reservation being always, of course, made for the arbitrament of their respective seconds. These gentlemen are the most difficult to manage, but a professional go-between, if gifted with any dexterity of address, can manage such matters wonderfully, provided he only takes care to intimate, with all possible courtesy, that his object is to insure secrecy in a case which will gain credit for nobody in Westminster Hall.

It may well be supposed, that no individual can lay claim to so much experience in such affairs, as to lay down these general rules ex cathedra. I certainly have never had above half-a-dozen cases of the kind occur to me, in five-and-twenty years of practice; but I suspect that although we scarcely hear of half-a-dozen duels in the course of a year, there are at least half-a-hundred cases within the same time, in which matters would proceed to extremity, but for the interposition of judicious, or injudicious friends where the judgment is wanting, reconciliation is not effected without discredit to one party or the other; my object is to guide such interference with judgment.

All cases of quarreling between private friends, though they stop short of the extreme of personal conflict, are very “awkward cases,” when recourse is had to professional interference; private quarrels become implacable exactly in proportion as they become public, and when they originate in pecuniary questions, as they generally do if they require our aid, it is not easy to avoid giving publicity to them. It is very difficult to manage such matters by rule; we must be guided by the importance of the sum in controversy-by the relative position of the parties—by their respective tempers, and personal character; whatever these may chance to be, one danger is specially to be avoided- we must treat the whole affair in the dry style of business, and be most cautious not to involve ourselves in the irritation of our clients. A family dispute is one of the rare instances in which sluggishness is prudential on the attorney's part: he risks very little in the way of credit by inactivity, for intimate friends or near relations are extremely well-disposed to reconciliation after a reasonable time to cool; and then they are well pleased that matters have not been hurried on to that point

which entangles reconciliation with troublesome questions of costs. It has been my principle never to issue a writ, or file a bill, between members of the same family, till I have been positively dunned into proceeding; nor even then, till every proposal of reference to counsel, or to friends, has been deliberately and advisedly rejected. I may have lost an equity suit or two by this extreme precaution, but I believe I have never lost a client, and often saved a friend.

Conjugal differences form a large proportion of the class of "awkward cases" referred to the family solicitor; and in cases of this description, the principle that I have just laid down must be reversed; they rarely, if ever, admit of permanent reconciliation: indeed I should say never, unless by a happy chance, both husband and wife are people of good sense, and the interests of children are at stake; it is seldom however, when this is the case, that conjugal differences arrive at that point that requires foreign interposition. It is true in most instances, but in conjugal disputes the rule has no exception, that both sides are in fault; the same may be predicated of the yet