Nekhludoff felt an irresistible loathing toward this ready talker who, by his tone of voice, meant to show that he and Nekhludoff belonged to a different sphere than the other clients.

“He worried me to death.  He is an awful rogue.  I wanted to ease my mind,” said the lawyer, as if justifying his not speaking about Nekhludoff’s case.  “And now as to your case.  I have carefully examined it, ‘and could not approve the contents thereof,’ as Tourgeniff has it.  That is to say, the lawyer was a wretched one, and he let slip all the grounds of appeal.”

“What have you decided to do?”

“One moment.  Tell him,” he turned to his clerk, who had just entered, “that I will not change my terms.  He can accept them or not, as he pleases.”

“He does not accept them.”

“Well, then, let him go,” said the lawyer, and his benign and joyful countenance suddenly assumed a gloomy and angry expression.

“They say that lawyers take money for nothing,” he said, again assuming a pleasant expression.  “I succeeded in obtaining the discharge of an insolent debtor who was incarcerated on flimsy accusations of fraud, and now they all run after me.  And every such case requires great labor.  We, too, you know, leave some of our flesh in the ink-pot, as some author said.”

“Well, now, your case, or rather the case in which you are interested,” he continued; “was badly conducted.  There are no good grounds for appeal, but, of course, we can make an attempt.  This is what I have written.”

He took a sheet of paper, and quickly swallowing some uninteresting, formal words, and emphasizing others, he began to read: 

“To the Department of Cassation, etc., etc., Katherine, etc.  Petition.  By the decision, etc., of the etc., rendered, etc., a certain Maslova was found guilty of taking the life, by poisoning, of a certain merchant Smelkoff, and in pursuance of Chapter 1,454 of the Code, was sentenced to etc., with hard labor, etc.”

He stopped, evidently listening with pleasure to his own composition, although from constant use he knew the forms by heart.

“‘This sentence is the result of grave errors,’ he continued with emphasis, ’and ought to be reversed for the following reasons:  First, the reading in the indictment of the description of the entrails of Smelkoff was interrupted by the justiciary at the very beginning.’—­One.”

“But the prosecutor demanded its reading,” Nekhludoff said with surprise.

“That is immaterial; the defense could have demanded the same thing.”

“But that was entirely unnecessary.”

“No matter, it is a ground of appeal.  Further:  ’Second.  Maslova’s attorney,’ he continued to read, ’was interrupted while addressing the jury, by the justiciary, when, desiring to depict the character of Maslova, he touched upon the inner causes of her fall.  The ground for refusing to permit him to continue his address was stated to be irrelevancy to the question at issue.  But as has often been pointed out by the Senate, the character and moral features generally of an accused are to be given the greatest weight in determining the question of intent.’—­Two.”