"Yes; Mr Rubb is a partner in my brother's house, and sells oilcloth, and things of that sort, and is not by any means aristocratic. I know what you mean." "Don't be angry with me, my dear." "Angry! I am not a bit angry. Why should I be angry? A man who keeps a shop is not, I suppose, a gentleman. But then, you know, I don't care about gentlemen,--about any gentleman, or any gentlemen." Miss Baker sighed, and then the conversation dropped. She had always cared about gentlemen,--and once in her life, or perhaps twice, had cared about a gentleman. Yes; Mr Rubb was coming down again. He had written to say that it was necessary that he should again see Miss Mackenzie about the money. The next morning after the conversation which has just been recorded, Miss Mackenzie got another letter about the same money, of which it will be necessary to say more in the next chapter. CHAPTER X Plenary Absolutions The letter which Miss Mackenzie received was from old Mr Slow, her lawyer; and it was a very unpleasant letter. It was so unpleasant that it made her ears tingle when she read it and remembered that the person to whom special allusion was made was one whom she had taught herself to regard as her friend. Mr Slow's letter was as follows: 7 Little St Dunstan Court, April, 186--. DEAR MADAM, I think it proper to write to you specially, about the loan made by you to Messrs Rubb and Mackenzie, as the sum lent is serious, and as there has been conduct on the part of some one which I regard as dishonest. I find that what we have done in the matter has been regulated rather by the fact that you and Mr Mackenzie are brother and sister, than by the ordinary course of such business; and I perceive that we had special warrant given to us for this by you in your letter of the 23rd November last; but, nevertheless, it is my duty to explain to you that Messrs Rubb and Mackenzie, or,--as I believe to be the case, Mr Samuel Rubb, junior, of that firm,--have not dealt with you fairly. The money was borrowed for the purpose of buying certain premises, and, I believe, was laid out in that way. But it was borrowed on the special understanding that you, as the lender, were to have the title-deeds of that property, and the first mortgage upon them. It was alleged, when the purchase was being made, that the money was wanted before the mortgage could be effected, and you desired us to advance it. This we did, aware of the close family connection between yourself and one of the firm. Of course, on your instruction, we should have done this had there been no such relationship, but in that case we should have made further inquiry, and, probably, have ventured to advise you. But though the money was so advanced without the completion of the mortgage, it was advanced on the distinct understanding that the security proffered in the first instance was to be forthcoming