In the Superior Courts this would have been no excuse. The man would probably have gone to prison, leaving his wife and family upon the parish. But here that novel sentiment in law proceedings—sympathy—peeped forth. ‘I believe this man would pay,’ said the barrister, ‘if possible. But he has lost everything in the world. At present I shall make no order.’ It did not appear to me that the plaintiffs generally in this Court were anxious to press very hardly upon defendants. Indeed it would be bad policy to do so. Give a man time, and he can often meet demands that it would be impossible for him to defray if pressed at once. ‘Immediate execution’ in this Court, seemed to be payment within a fortnight. An order to pay in weekly instalments is a common mode of arranging a case, and as it is usually made by agreement between the parties, both of them are satisfied. In fact the rule of the Court seemed not dissimilar from that of tradespeople who want to do a quick business, and who proceed upon the principle that ‘No reasonable offer is refused.’ I had been in the Court sufficiently long to make these and other observations, when Mr. Ficker introduced me to the clerk. On leaving the Court by a side door, we repaired to Mr. Nottit’s room, where we found that gentleman, (an old attorney,) prepared to do the honours of ‘a glass of sherry and a biscuit.’ Of course the conversation turned upon ‘the County Court.’ ‘Doing a pretty good business here?’ said Mr. Ficker. ‘Business—we’re at it all day,’ replied Mr. Nottit. ‘I’ll show you. This is an account of the business of the County Courts in England and Wales in the year 1848; the account for 1849 is not yet made up.’ ‘Takes six months, I suppose, to make it,’ said Mr. Ficker, rather ill-naturedly. ‘Total “Number of Plaints or Causes entered,”’ read the clerk, ‘427,611.’ ‘Total amount of money sought to be recovered by the plaintiffs,’ continued Mr. Nottit, ‘1,346,802_l._’ ‘Good Gracious!’ exclaimed Ficker, his face expressing envy and indignation; ‘what a benefit would have been conferred upon society, if all this property had been got into the legitimate Law Courts. What a benefit to the possessors of all this wealth. I have no doubt whatever that during the past year the suitors who have recovered this million and a quarter have spent the whole of it, squandered it upon what they called “necessaries of life.” Look at the difference if it had only been locked up for them—say in Chancery. It would have been preserved with the greatest possible safety; accounted for—every fraction of it—in the books of the Accountant-General; and we, Sir, we—the respectable practitioners in the profession—should have gone down three or four times every year to the Master’s offices to see that it was all right, and to have had a little consultation as to the best means of holding it safely for our client, until his suit was properly and equitably disposed of.’