spected by his elders and legal compeers for the solidity of his attainments, his perspicuity of intellect, and his powers of argument, and closely connected with influential persons in society, who, though advanced in age and social position, made of this brilliant young man an intimate companion and confidential friend, he seemed sure of eminent success. "For two years," says Mr. Walker, "there could not have been a more devoted student. His very first argument, made before the moot court of which I acted as judge, on a question of commercial law, has left such an impression on my mind, that, at the distance of nearly seventeen years, I remember it as one of the most finished and lawyer-like arguments I have ever heard.” "He made great proficiency in the study of the law," says also his friend T. Howe, Esq., "and acquired a remarkably clear, strong, and comprehensive knowledge of the great principles of jurisprudence, to which, as a science, he always remained much attached."

"But though," continues Mr. Howe, "he was successful as a beginner, Mr. Perkins remained but a short time in practice. This he found to be, in the last degree, distasteful, and so different from the pure, exhilarating, intellectual excitement of the study, that he became impressed with such disgust as never afterwards, I think, to do full justice to the profession. His moral standard, though not higher than all should have, was far higher than that of the great majority of his professional associates. They laughed at many of his views as absurd and Quixotic. Much of a young lawyer's business is necessarily of a small, pettifogging sort, where no great principle is involved, and where the feelings and habits from the magistrate downwards are comparatively low.

And it must be confessed, too, that, at this period, the tone and character of the Cincinnati bar were nowise encouraging to a high-minded man. It was under these circumstances that Mr. Perkins determined to quit the profession." "Two reasons mainly influenced him," adds Judge Walker. "In the first place, a sedentary life was prejudicial to his health. But a more weighty reason with him was, that he could not conscientiously do all that was required of a lawyer in order to secure success. And here I may remark, that, of all men with whom I have been intimately acquainted, he was the most scrupulously, the most heroically conscientious." His views are thus fully stated by himself

"Dear Sir, In reply to your inquiry, why I leave my profession, I answer, 1st, because in a city it is too sedentary and adverse to firm health; 2d, because the drudgery of it is injurious to the intellect; 3d, because the devotion which it requires is greater than I am willing to give to any merely worldly concern, which either does not affect my higher powers or impairs them; and 4th, because the rules of morality by which lawyers are governed do not, in many points, coincide with my own views, and I am not independent enough of my daily labor to enable me to oppose the ways of the profession. Upon this last point alone shall I

say any thing.

"The common code among the lawyers with whom I have talked is this, that they are not called on to refuse to conduct suits, the bringing or resisting of which is clearly wrong on the part of their client; and that their business is to see the law enforced, and not to attend to the equitable operation of that law in certain cases. For instance, one man rents a house of another for a month; when the month is up, the owner wishes to let it to some one else, and the

tenant wishes to retain it, though he has no shadow of right; this tenant goes to a lawyer and states his wish; the lawyer sees that he has no claim, but he appears for him before the justice, and the justice decides against the tenant; his proceedings have, in some point, however, been informal; the lawyer takes advantage of this want of form to remove the case to a higher court, where it may remain undecided for one or two years, during which time the tenant retains possession. In this case, the lawyer, instead of refusing to assist in gaining what he knows to be an unjust claim, uses the law, which was made to prevent injustice, to work injustice; he sees the claim to be wrong in the claimant, he knows that, should he assist the claimant as a friend, he would be equally in the wrong, but as a lawyer he does right. Now, to my mind, no man can rightfully do as a lawyer what is wrong in him as a man; he cannot by assuming a profession put off God's moral law; and as to his duty being to see the law fulfilled, it is not so if the law is meant to work injustice; nor if, from man's imperfection, it does work injustice in particular cases. His duty is to see the purpose of the law, and not its letter, fulfilled, and that is JUSTICE. “It is said, however, that the law must be literally carried out, or it becomes uncertain, and the consequent public injury more than outweighs the private good. This principle should make the judge always respect the law, no matter what evil results from its application, and it may even warrant the lawyer in taking advantage of the technicalities in the progress of a just suit, because to neglect them may cause looseness of practice and evil; but it can never authorize him to commence an unjust suit, or to bring up technicalities that they may be violated.

"I have spoken of the creed above referred to as common among those lawyers whom I have consulted. Perhaps the expression is too broad, for I do not know that most of the profession hold to it in its bare form, and I do know some who

abhor it; but most of those with whom I have talked approved it, and among them were men of pure character and romantic notions of honor. To me the doctrine seems opposed to all sound morality, and I hope there are those coming forward in the West who will do it away. While men think the course right and Christian, I bring no charge against them; we are all too self-deceiving to make that safe, for though their error, as I think it, may result from their interest and non-examination, and so be criminal, it is equally certain that it may not. But against the creed that a man may do as a lawyer what would be wrong as a friend and fellow-man, I would enter my protest as strongly as against any criminal and immoral doctrine; nor do I believe the profession will ever exert the influence they should, until they declare this doctrine rank heresy. Their duties, their powers, their privileges, are in themselves noble and Christian; but they are as yet perverted and disgraced by too many, and that without reproof."

Thus freed from the drudgery and temptations of the law, Mr. Perkins devoted himself with new energy to literature. He had already conducted with signal ability the Western Monthly Magazine, and was now engaged as editor of the Evening Chronicle. This paper he purchased in the winter of 1835, and united it with the Cincinnati Mirror, which was then published by William D. Gallagher and Thomas H. Shreve, when, for six months, this very spirited and successful weekly was edited by the three friends conjointly. From Mr. Shreve, whose brilliant wit and elegant taste have for many years enlivened the Louisville Gazette, comes the following brief, yet truthful sketch.

"All the little intimacy I enjoyed with Mr. Perkins was embraced within the years 1834-35; and the rec

ollection of my intercourse with him during that period is among the treasures of my memory. He was in the habit of coming into the office early in the morning, and, without any preliminaries, would proceed to his table and write as if he had just stepped out a moment before. It was one of his characteristics, I think, to do what he designed doing at once, for he was a true economist of time, and acted while persons generally would be getting ready to act.

"He would frequently turn round and ask my opinion of some subject on which he happened to be writing. A conversation, perhaps a controversy, would ensue. His object was not so much to ascertain my opinions, as to place his own mind in a condition to act efficiently. When our talk was ended, he would resume his writing. It was during our business connection that I was first informed of the unsoundness of his health. I have seen him start up from his table, hastily throw pen and paper aside, strike his breast with his fist, complain of feeling unwell there, and then, drawing his hat or cap down over his eyes, walk off rapidly. At such times I have known him to walk two or three miles, when he would return and resume what he had left unfinished. He would also complain of vertigo, and has often told me that he had eaten no breakfast.

"I am unable to give you any anecdotes or illustrative reminiscences. Had you assigned me the pleasant task of recording my impressions of his character, then I could have written quite as much as you would willingly read. You know, far better than I, that his devotion to truth was a leading quality of his nature. cing the practice of the law at the time he did, for the reason that he could not practise it successfully without

His renoun