he took the position, nevertheless; acting as legal
representative of the sole Executor under the second Will. I am bound to
say I should have done the same myself in his place.

"The serious question follows, What can we do for the best in your
interests? The Will executed under my professional superintendence, on
the thirtieth of September last, is at present superseded and revoked
by the second and later Will, executed on the third of November. Can we
dispute this document?

"I doubt the possibility of disputing the new Will on the face of it.
It is no doubt irregularly expressed; but it is dated, signed,
and witnessed as the law directs; and the perfectly simple and
straightforward provisions that it contains are in no respect, that I
can see, technically open to attack.

"This being the case, can we dispute the Will on the ground that it has
been executed when the Testator was not in a fit state to dispose of his
own property? or when the Testator was subjected to undue and improper
influence?

"In the first of these cases, the medical evidence would put an obstacle
in our way. We cannot assert that previous illness had weakened the
Testator's mind. It is clear that he died suddenly, as the doctors had
all along declared he would die, of disease of the heart. He was out
walking in his garden, as usual, on the day of his death; he ate a
hearty dinner; none of the persons in his service noticed any change in
him; he was a little more irritable with them than usual, but that was
all. It is impossible to attack the state of his faculties: there is no
case to go into court with, so far.

"Can we declare that he acted under undue influence; or, in plainer
terms, under the influence of Mrs. Lecount?

"There are serious difficulties, again, in the way of taking this
course. We cannot assert, for example, that Mrs. Lecount has assumed
a place in the will which she has no fair claim to occupy. She has
cunningly limited her own legacy, not only to what is fairly due her,
but to what the late Mr. Michael Vanstone himself had the intention of
leaving her. If I were examined on the subject, I should be compelled
to acknowledge that I had heard him express this intention myself. It is
only the truth to say that I have heard him express it more than once.
There is no point of attack in Mrs. Lecount's legacy, and there is no
point of attack in your late husband's choice of an executor. He
has made the wise choice, and the na