Then there was the famous will in “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde”: the very worthy lawyer, Mr. Utterson, who was “lean, long, dusty, dreary and, somehow, lovable,” refused to write this will, wherein Dr. Jekyll left his possessions to his friend and benefactor, Edward Hyde. Mr. Hyde was also to be the possessor of this property if Dr. Jekyll should disappear for a period exceeding three calendar months, the same to be free from burden or obligation, beyond the payment of a few small sums to members of the Doctor’s household. THE WILL OF LORD MONMOUTH In “Coningsby,” by Disraeli, the reading of Lord Monmouth’s will is a feature. The document is lengthy, and numerous codicils have been added from time to time, involving many modifications. The last codicil of all, however, was the most startling, for under it all former dispositions were upset. MR. CASAUBON’S WILL In George Eliot’s “Middlemarch,” we find the will of Mr. Casaubon. This gentleman had married a girl, Dorothea Brooke, who was very much younger than himself. By his will, he very properly gave her all his property. However, on reflection, and for reasons best known to himself, he added a codicil and placed the legacy given to his wife, upon the condition that she did not marry one Ladislaw. It would further appear that until the reading of this codicil, it had not occurred to Dorothea that Ladislaw might be a possible lover; but he became one, and the very suggestion of the testator caused the defeat of the latter’s wishes. ANTHONY TROLLOPE’S “ORLEY FARM” Our author tells us of a forgery of a codicil by the second wife of the testator: a son by a first wife is cut off, and the farm is left to a son by the second wife. This codicil is in the handwriting of the widow, witnessed by an attorney whose daughter received a handsome legacy, the other witnesses being a clerk and a maidservant. The widow swears that the codicil was drawn at the attorney’s dictation, in the husband’s hearing, and that she was present when it was signed by all the parties. The witnesses gave evidence as to the due execution of the codicil. The instrument was admitted to probate. It developed, however, that there was another paper, a dissolution of partnership, signed on the same day by the same witnesses. The result was, that the charming widow was found guilty of perjury. MR. MEESON’S WILL The following description of this famous will is taken from the _Green Bag_: