case walmesley versus booth June the that SC cite ante vol SC cite Ves SC cite  Ves SC barn Charles Rep Japhet crook in be under a prosecution for perjury and  forgery employ the defendant as his attorney to get bail which he do accord  and during this transaction draw crook will who direct a legacy of pound to  the defendant and pound apiece to the bail and afterward the defendant get a  bind for the security of his legacy crook afterward revoke this will and by  another appoint the plaintiff executrix and make her residuary legatee after  the death of the testator the defendant bring a action on his bind and have a  verdict and judgement a bill bring to be relieve against it for fraud crook  live six year after give the bind and not attempt to be relieve Lord Hardwicke  decree for the defendant Japhet crook in the year be under several prosecution  of a criminal nature in the court of king bench for perjury and forgery employ  the defendant that booth as his attorney who after many fruitless endeavour  crook himself to get bail by his diligence find out two person to be bind with  crook in a recognizance in very large sum and in the course of these  transaction the time of the defendant be principal take up for many week in  this interval he draw the will of crook who give instruction for it himself in  write in which with his own hand he direct a legacy of pound to the defendant  and pound apiece to the bail the will be prepare by the defendant and execute  by crook and after this at the request of the defendant crook give he a bind  for the security of his legacy in which there be a condition in the word  follow or to this effect that whereas John booth have be serviceable to Japhet  crook in several cause and still continue to be so and the say Japhet crook be  through sensible of his service and favour if the say Japhet crook shall leave  to the say John booth a legacy of pound then the obligation shall be void  otherwise to stand in full force crook afterward revoke this will and by  another will appoint mary walmesley executrix and make her residuary legatee  by which she become entitle to pound atkins the legacy to booth under the  former be omit in the new will the testator declare in this will that the  procure that legacy from he be by imposition crook die in and some time after  mary intermarry with one walmesley against who booth bring a action upon the  bind and have a verdict and judgement and a bill be file here by mary and her  husband to be relieve against it as obtain by fraud and imposition Lord  chancellor this be one of those kind of bind which the court must dislike at  the first appearance but notwithstanding there must be some circumstance of  fraud or a want of consideration to induce I to lie it aside now upon the  circumstance of the case and upon the recital of the bind I must take this to  be a voluntary bind for though here be a mention of service yet they be not  such as will create a debt or a valuable consideration nor be they such as  will make it in its nature a demand or what the law call a valuable  consideration I shall have think it a much strong case have it be for payment  of money atkins er p at a certain day but this be to be pay future by a  executor now crook may not leave asset for though in sufficient circumstance  at the time of give the bind yet he may have contrive it so as to have no  asset at his death and it be true say that such a bind accord to the case in  Lord harcourt time shall be postpone to all debt whatsoever even simple  contract one so that this can by no mean be a security for money it have be  insist on that as this person stand in no other light than a attorney to crook  he can entitle himself to the bind to be sure it be extreme wrong in a  attorney to take bind for service but if a client with his eye open will give  such a bind it will be go too far to say such a bind be absolute void this  case have be compare to that of young heir in distress for money in the  lifetime of the father but I do not think this come up to the present case for  there the court presume weakness in the person and upon that consideration  relieve but there be no pretence for it here for Japhet crook be more likely  to impose than to be impose upon see ante vol but see post and yet if there  have be the slight evidence of imposition upon crook I shall make no scruple  of relieve against this bind the length of time that crook live after the  execute of this bind be certain a strong circumstance in favour of the de  atkins fendant why do not crook if he think himself aggrieve in six year bring  a bill to be relieve for he have the same equity which the executrix set up  now by the present bill upon the whole I be of opinion on the circumstance of  this case that the bind can be relieve against and that the injunction which  be to stay the proceed at law must be dissolve may the d in the paper of  rehear Lord chancellor this be a case of a good deal of consequence and I be  extreme glad that I have a opportunity of reconsider it in the manner it  deserve I believe I do say at the former hear that it will be a extraordinary  thing if the representative of Japhet crook shall prevail to set aside a bind  fraudulent obtain and by imposition upon a man who character for art and  cunning be so well establish in the world but upon this case be reargued and  reconsider I be through convince that my former decree be wrong the first  consideration arise upon the general nature of the bind as it be obtain by a  attorney from his client while the client be under criminal prosecution I  think this be a very material ingredient in the case and be the principal  ground I go upon in give judgement in this case atorneys and solicitor  especial since the late act of parliament Geo c have be consider as officer of  justice and they have state fee allot they which they ought not to exceed and  therefore in all court but more especial in court of law there be certain rule  for regulate their behaviour with regard to their client upon this ground if a  man retain a attorney to appear for he and he do not appear accord the court  will punish he for it and on the other side they will not suffer a person who  have make choice of a attorney in a cause to change he without the express  leave of the court the consequence of this be that there be a strong alliance  between a attorney and his client and a great obligation upon the attorney to  take care of his client interest and the court will relieve a client against  the extortion of a attorney vide draper company v Davis post sanderson v glass  post atkins this be the general rule let we now consider the present case the  defendant Mr booth do not pretend to say that he have the least acquaintance  with Japhet crook till October and very little business appear to have be do  from this time till the give the bind and allow that all fee be pay and every  thing admit beside that can be charge for the most trifle attendance during  the period from to the time of the bind it be not pretend there be any must  than S due to the defendant at the time of the execution of it Japhet crook be  then under prosecution for two different offence of a very heinous nature one  for forgery and another for perjury for which he afterward suffer as he  deserve and under these circumstance to be sure it concern he very much to  find out person who will be bail for he there be a great many people without  doubt that bring distress upon themselves atkins er p but while they be in  such a situation it do not make the least difference whether this distress  come upon they through their fault or their misfortune while Japhet crook be  in this deplorable condition the defendant draw his will and give himself a  legacy of pound this be no very favourable circumstance that a attorney who  draw the will of a person in such a situation shall take the advantage and  secure to himself a legacy of pound and beside the insert the legacy in the  will it be carry much further and Japhet crook be prevail upon by the  defendant to give he a bind recite many and faithful service and particular  the procure bail on the criminal prosecution and the bind to remain in full  force till the executor of Japhet crook shall pay to the defendant the sum of  pound in six month from the testator death so that by this mean the money be  secure and it be to all intent and purpose make irrevocable it have be say by  Mr Chute that this be only a legacy give with a preference but it differ very  material from such a legacy because Japhet crook have bind himself in a bind  which make it a debt and irrevocable upon these consideration and attend with  such circumstance the defendant appear in a very unfavourable light to the  court this case have be compare in the first place to the defraud of young and  improvident heir where the court relieve upon general principle of mischief to  the public without require particular evidence of actual imposition upon they  atkins as they be case of general concern they also give relief because the  circumstance and situation of the young person at the time of the agreement  make they extreme liable to imposition see post now consider the condition of  Japhet crook at the time of enter into this bind he be under very severe  prosecution for very heinous offence and in such a case be oblige to call in a  attorney to his assistance it have be say that Japhet crook be a very cunning  fellow and a very great knave and I believe it to be true but the court must  not consider the particular circumstance of the man but the case in general  see ante for a person may be prosecute for these very crime and yet be  innocent and it will be very mischievous if there be any encouragement give to  a undue advantage take of another under such circumstance the next case to  which it have be compare be marriagebrocage bind which have some similitude  though not entire so smith v Aykwell post vol the next be the case of mortgage  as where a person take the advantage of another necessity and secure to  himself a exorbitant interest in which instance the court will set it aside if  he get any injust gainto himself though it be not do in the barefaced way of  interest but in some other shape what be the general rule the court go upon  why the person be such circumstance that any body may have take the advantage  of he and here the court will not allow a any more than b to get a illegal  benefit to himself so in this case Japhet crook be no more under a obligation  to employ the defendant as his attorney than any other I think the case be  strong between atorneys and their client than any of the case that it have be  compare with by the counsel because all the court both of law and equity order  their bill to be tax and there be a number of case in this court where a  client unassisted by a attorney have pay a law bill and accept of a receipt  for it and yet have be allow to open the whole account notwithstanding and to  take exception to any improper or extravagant charge in the attorney bill nay  even if a client have give a attorney a bind or mortgage to secure the payment  of what be charge to be due to atkins he on account of a lawsuit the court of  equity have relieve the client and order the bill to be tax draper company v  Davis post and what be the reason the court go upon in such determination why  the great power and influence that a attorney have over his client now  consider the present case here be a extravagant reward give for service and  the court if they have allow the legacy will in the first place have direct  the master to inquire what these service be and whether they be in any  proportion adequate to the reward these two case have be put by counsel that  after a suit be finish if a bind atkins er p be give to a attorney to secure  to he some reward for his merit and service in a cause or if after a marriage  have a security be give to a person who be instrumental in procure the match  for a considerable sum as a reward that this court will haye support they as  just demand these be certain very different case from the present but I do not  know that even in these there have ever be any determination but the bind here  do not import any thing of this kind for it only recite some pass service  which be immaterial and trifle but the principal consideration be for any  future service he may be ready to do he to be sure after a suit be entire at a  end a client may give a attorney a reward for service over and above his legal  fee Oldham v hand Ves these be my reason with regard to the public but there  be other reason that weigh with I in this case the defendant have say in his  answer that this be a voluntary bind but then he have likewise set forth the  reasonable motive which may induce Japhet crook to give this bind namely the  many and frequent service the defendant have do now what be they only the few  transaction from October to the time the bind bear date this be a false  recital and show likewise that there be some imposition and a undue advantage  take of Japhet crook necessity there be another circumstance too it appear  that the bail be give upon the certiorari the very day the bind be give atkins  just at a period of time when Japhet crook must have go to prison or put in  bail I do not enter into the consideration of hire bail because it do not  appear what be the nature of this bail now what be the defendant merit as to  this bail it do not so much as appear that he give any counter security to the  bail so that he have do nothing more than what every attorney do in the common  case of bail upon the whole I be of opinion that the court ought to pay no  regard to such a bind as it may be attend with bad consequence by encourage  atorneys after they have get into the secret of their client to extort from  they unreasonable reward to themselves vide Oldham v hand Ves Hylton v Hylton  Ves the question be whether this bind may stand as a security for such service  as the defendant have real do and for such demand as be real due and as the  plaintiff submit it shall I do not see any reason why the court shall  interpose but I shall give direction to the master to inquire what  extraordinary service the defendant have do to entitle he to any reward and  what be just due for fee and his lordship make a order accord