case walter Radcliffe Esq appellant marthan FURSMAN respondent that February  Mews dig v explain in pierce v pierce de g Sm Minet v Morgan l r Ch demurrer  to a bill require the defendant to set forth a case with counsel opinion for  that the plaintiff be not entitle to any such discovery the opinion be take  for the defendant own private use and satisfaction demurrer overrule on the  that of September jasper Radcliffe Esq give a bind in the penalty of pound to  jane Davy condition to pay her pound at pound per cent interest on the that of  September and on the that of October he give another bind to mary Andrews in  pound penalty condition to pay her pound with interest at pound per cent on  the that of October both which sum of pound and pound be the property of  Martha the wife of Henry Mannaton Esq and be take in trust for her and for her  separate use exclusive of her husband the say jasper Radcliffe by his will  date the that of October give pound per and to his daughter Martha Radcliffe  the respondent mother till she shall marry or die and if marry with the  consent of her mother he give her pound for her fortune Payable within twelve  month next after her marriage he then devise real estate of pound value of  which he be seize in fee to his wife jane Radcliffe and to the say Henry  Mannaton for year in trust for payment of all his just brown debt and legacy  and make jasper Radcliffe his son executor and residuary legatee and die in  November Martha Mannaton who be aunt to the respondent say mother Martha  Radcliffe by deed date the that of November appoint that immediate after her  own death the say pound and the interest then due shall be pay to the say  Martha Radcliffe for her separate use brown er p in Henry Mannaton die and in  July the say Martha his wife who have the equitable right to the money due on  the say bind and always have the custody and possession of they also die have  before her death make her will and thereof appoint the say Martha Radcliffe  executrix and residuary legatee jasper Radcliffe leave at his death three son  jasper Andrew and Walter the present appellant the two first die without issue  and the last of they in the appellant from that time as heir to his say father  and brother and as executor to his mother who be the survive trustee of the  year term receive the rend issue and profit of the trust estate charge with  the say pound and with the say bind debt and all other debt and legacy of  jasper Radcliffe his father on the that of may the say Martha Radcliffe marry  Mr John Fursman clerk with the consent of her mother but by article date and  execute the day before such marriage and to which the appellant be a party as  a trustee for the say Martha his sister it be agree that the say pound shall  be to the separate use of Martha for life or as she shall appoint or otherwise  to the issue of that marriage as direct by those article and that whatever  other real or personal estate shall come to the say Martha from Martha  Mannaton or otherwise shall belong to her the say Martha and be to her  separate use and shall be vest in the appellant and Francis Gregor Esq for her  separate use and for such other use she shall by will or write appoint accord  mrs Fursman by her will date the that of may after some particular legacy give  the residuum of her personal estate to the appellant and Francis Gregor and  other trustee therein name in trust for the child she then be big with which  be the respondent and make her husband executor and die on the that of June  leave the respondent her only child and Mr Fursman thereupon prove her will in  the proper ecclesiastical court Francis Mannaton Esq executor of the say Henry  Mannaton be satisfy that the bind be original the separate property of Martha  the wife of the say Henry Mannaton his testator on the that of October declare  the same under his hand and seal and that they therefore belong to the  respondent and John Towgood administrator de good non of jane Davy the obligee  in one of the say bind by write date the saint of January and Thomas mordant  and mary his wife former mary Andrews the obligee in the other of the say bind  brown declare by write under their hand date the that of November that the say  bind belong to the respondent by title under the say Martha Mannaton for who  the say jane Davy and mary Andrews be trustee and to who they be near relation  application be make to the appellant on behalf of the respondent for payment  of the say legacy and bind and he have refuse to pay the same a bill be in  easter term exhibit against he in the court of chancery in the name of the  respondent by her next friend to compel he to pay the same this bill charge  that the appellant well know or believe that these bind be never pay and as a  demonstration thereof that the appellant himself or some person on his behalf  so declare or state in some case for the opinion of some counsel but to  conceal the truth of such case he state the same by way of a b and c and other  letter and in particular state that a b innuendo the say jasper Radcliffe the  father die about four year after give two bind innuendo the say two bind  without payment thereof and further state that the old son of the say a b die  about seven year after his father without pay any part of the principal or  interest due on the say bind and then consult whether length of time will not  prejudice the respondent right to the say bind the bill therefore require a  particular discovery of these fact and that the say case may be set forth in  haec word litter to so much of this bill as require the appellant to set forth  in haec word litter the say case state by he for the opinion of counsel or to  what counsel such case be state or what opinion be give thereon he demurrer  allege for cause that the plaintiff be not entitle to any such discovery and  that the opinion be take for the appellant own private use and satisfaction  brown er p this demurrer be argue before the Lord chancellor king on the d of  march his lordship be please to overrule the same as to set forth the say case  but to allow it as to all other matter the appellant therefore appeal from so  much of this order as overrule the first part of his demurrer contend p York t  Lutwyche that case state for the opinion of counsel be intend for private  instruction and information only in order to direct party in the conductor  their affair and be frequent state only on a supposition of fact for the  purpose of introduce the question propose and it will be of the utmost  consequence to the property of many family if any person by a mere suggestion  in a bill in equity shall be allow to compel a defendant to set out the state  of such case or case as he may have think fit to frame for his own private  direction or that his agent may have think fit to frame for he and if a  precedent of this kind be once establish it will become a common suggestion in  all bill in equity that by the law and the know practice of all brown court of  law and equity no counsellor or attorney can be oblige or ought to discover  any matter which his client reveal to he or which he know only from the  information of his client and this be the privilege of the client and not of  the counsel or attorney but if the expedient in the present case shall take  place all this precaution of the law will be elude and the client may upon a  bare suggestion be compel to discover not only a case state for the opinion  and advice of counsel but by parity or reason a brief or any other instruction  give to his counsel or attorney and even what have pass at a consultation with  they that the respondent do not mere seek a discovery of some particular fact  or circumstance suppose to be state in the case but require the whole to be  set out in the very word and letter of it whereas it often happen that many  matter be contain in case state for counsel which no way concern the person  seek such discovery and this may be the case at present for any thing that  appear in the cause to the contrary it be therefore pray that such part of the  demurrer as have be overrule may be allow on the other side it be say c Talbot  l stucley that the state of the case be allege to be touch bind which be due  to the respondent and Payable by the appellant and sure a creditor be entitle  in a court of equity to have a discovery from a debtor whether the debt be  just due or not and for that purpose to know what the debtor may have write do  or say concern the same and such a discovery it be high reasonable to require  in a case like the present where the principal defence rely upon be a  presumption of satisfaction arise from the length of time that the state of  the say case be in a matter where the appellant be not mere concern in his own  right but as a trustee of the bind for the respondent and a trustee also of  the estate liable to the payment of they and beside no inconvenience can  possible arise to he from make such discovery but pay the bind upon its appear  that they be real due accord after hear counsel on this appeal it be order and  adjudge that the same shall be dismiss and the order therein complain of  affirm jour vol p