above a quarter of an hour, it became manifest
that he did not intend to alter his course of proceeding, and while
the judges were absent it was said by everybody in the court that the
Countess and Lady Anna had gained their suit.

"I consider it to be a most disgraceful course of proceeding on the
part of Sir William Patterson," said the rector to a middle-aged
legal functionary, who was managing clerk to Norton and Flick.

"We all think, sir, that there was more fight in it," said the legal
functionary.

"There was plenty of fight in it. I don't believe that any jury in
England would willingly have taken such an amount of property from
the head of the Lovel family. For the last twenty years,--ever since
I first heard of the pretended English marriage,--everybody has known
that she was no more a Countess than I am. I can't understand it;
upon my word I can't. I have not had much to do with law, but I've
always been brought up to think that an English barrister would be
true to his client. I believe a case can be tried again if it can be
shown that the lawyers have mismanaged it." The unfortunate rector,
when he made this suggestion, no doubt forgot that the client in this
case was in full agreement with the wicked advocate.

The judges were absent for about half an hour, and on their return
the Chief Justice declared that his learned brother,--the Serjeant
namely,--had better proceed with the case on behalf of his clients.
He went on to explain that as the right to the property in dispute,
and indeed the immediate possession of that property, would be ruled
by the decision of the jury, it was imperative that they should hear
what the learned counsel for the so-called Countess and her daughter
had to say, and what evidence they had to offer, as to the validity
of her marriage. It was not to be supposed that he intended to throw
any doubt on that marriage, but such would be the safer course. No
doubt, in the ordinary course of succession, a widow and a daughter
would inherit and divide among them in certain fixed proportions the
personal property of a deceased but intestate husband and father,
without the intervention of any jury to declare their rights. But in
this case suspicion had been thrown and adverse statements had been
made; and as his learned brother was, as a matter of course, provided
with evidence to prove that which the plaintiff had come into the
court with the professed intention of disproving, the ca