But when he came to look into the case his joy abated somewhat, for it was one of the most perplexing that he had ever known.  The will contested, which was that of a Yorkshire money-lender, disposed of property to the value of over L80,000, and was propounded by a niece of the testator who, when he died, if not actually weak in his mind, was in his dotage, and superstitious to the verge of insanity.  The niece to whom all the property was left—­to the exclusion of the son and daughter of the deceased, both married, and living away from home—­stayed with the testator and looked after him.  Shortly before his death, however, he and this niece had violently quarrelled on account of an intimacy which the latter had formed with a married man of bad repute, who was a discharged lawyer’s clerk.  So serious had been the quarrel that only three days before his death the testator had sent for a lawyer and formally, by means of a codicil, deprived the niece of a sum of L2,000 which he had left her, all the rest of his property being divided between his son and daughter.  Three days afterwards, however, he duly executed a fresh will, in the presence of two servants, by which he left all his property to the niece, to the entire exclusion of his own children.  This will, though very short, was in proper form and was written by nobody knew whom.  The servants stated that the testator before signing it was perfectly acquainted with its contents, for the niece had made him repeat them in their presence.  They also declared, however, that he seemed in a terrible fright, and said twice, “It’s behind me; it’s behind me!”

Within an hour of the signing of the will the testator was found dead, apparently from the effects of fear, but the niece was not in the room at the time of death.  The only other remarkable circumstance in the case was that the disreputable lover of the niece had been seen hanging about the house at dusk, the testator having died at ten o’clock at night.  There was also a further fact.  The son, on receiving a message from the niece that his father was seriously worse, had hurried with extraordinary speed to the house, passing some one or something—­he could not tell what—­that seemed to be running, apparently from the window of the sick man’s room, which was on the ground floor, and beneath which footmarks were afterwards found.  Of these footmarks two casts had been taken, of which photographs were forwarded with the brief.  They had been made by naked feet of small size, and in each case the little joint of the third toe of the right foot seemed to be missing.  But all attempts to find the feet that made them had hitherto failed.  The will was contested by the next of kin, for whom Geoffrey was one of the counsel, upon the usual grounds of undue influence and fraud; but as it seemed at present with small prospect of success, for, though the circumstances were superstitious enough, there was not the slightest evidence of either.  This curious case, of which the outlines are here written, is briefly set out, because it proved to be the foundation of Geoffrey’s enormous practice and reputation at the Bar.