A desultory conversation ensued, when it was finally settled that the trial must be postponed until the arrival of the counsel expected from town. From the beginning of the discussion, Williams knew such must be the termination of that day’s work; but he had accomplished two great objects by his motion. In the first place, by conceding delay to the accused, it placed the prosecution on ground where a similar favour might be asked, should it be deemed expedient. This resisting of motions for delay is a common _ruse_ of the bar, since it places the party whose rights are seemingly postponed in a situation to demand a similar concession. Williams knew that his case was ready as related to his brief, the testimony, and all that could properly be produced in court; but he thought it might be strengthened out of doors, among the jurors and the witnesses. We say, the witnesses; because even this class of men get their impressions, quite frequently, as much from what they subsequently hear, as from what they have seen and know. A good reliable witness, who relates no more than he actually knows, conceals nothing, colours nothing, and leaves a perfectly fair impression of the truth, is perhaps the rarest of all the parties concerned in the administration of justice. No one understood this better than Williams; and his agents were, at that very moment, actively employed in endeavouring to persuade certain individuals that they knew a great deal more of the facts connected with the murders, than the truth would justify. This was not done openly or directly; not in a way to alarm the consciences or pride of those who were to be duped, but by the agency of hints, and suggestions, and plausible reasonings, and all the other obvious devices, by means of which the artful and unprincipled are enabled to act on the opinions of the credulous and inexperienced.