d under
circumstances which warrant us in saying, that "even his failings leaned
to virtue's side."

Connected with and immediately dependent upon this imputation upon the
late Sir William Follett, is another which cannot be overlooked. He is
charged with having made a profit of his prodigious popularity and
reputation, by discreditably and unconscientiously receiving fees from
clients for services which he well knew at the time that he could not
possibly render to them; in short, with taking briefs in cases to which
he had no reasonable hope of being able to attend. This is a very grave
accusation, and requires a deliberate and honest examination. It is a
long-established rule of English law, that barristers have no legal
means of recovering their fees, even in cases of most arduous and
successful exertion, except in the very few instances where a barrister
may consider it consistent with the dignity of his position to enter
beforehand into an express agreement with his client for the payment of
his fees[A]. A barrister's fee is regarded, in the eye of the law, as
_quiddam honorarium_; and is usually--and ought to be invariably--paid
beforehand, on the brief being delivered. A fee thus paid, a rule at the
bar forbids being returned, except under very special circumstances; and
the rule in question is a very reasonable one. As counsel have no legal
title to remuneration, however laborious their exertions, what would be
their position if they were expected or required to return their fees at
the instance of unreasonable and disappointed clients? Where ought the
line to be drawn? Who is to be the judge in such a case? A client may
have derived little or no benefit from his counsel's exertions, which
may yet have been very great; an accident, an oversight may have
intervened, and prevented his completing those exertions by attending at
the trial either at all, or during the whole of the trial; he may have
become unable to provide an efficient substitute; through the sudden
pressure of other engagements, he may be unable to bestow upon the case
the deliberate and thorough consideration which it requires--an
unexpected and formidable difficulty may prove too great for his means
of overcoming it, as might have been the case with men of superior skill
and experience;--in these and many other instances which might be put,
an angry and defeated client would rarely be without some pretext for
requiring the return of his fees, and