viewed all proceedings at the bar, all minutiæ of practice with deep interest, and his large experience enabled him to easily detect incongruities and errors which occurred in pleading, practice, and on trial. Few lawyers were more perfect in their preparation of a case for trial or argument than he. His papers always exhibited, what a correct system of pleading demands, a brief philosophic statement of legally deduced facts, from the circumstances attendant upon the matter complained of, a proper denial of which contains the statements of the opposite party's defense, governed by the same rules, and which forms the issue to be tried by a jury. Like many of the older lawyers, he disliked the Code, preferring the mathematical precision of the old practice, which, though incumbered by some useless words, was adopted by such minds as Barron, Coke and Mansfield, and admired by all the great lawyers of England and America. But this did not deter him from acquiring a perfect understanding of the new practice.

A lawyer of extensive practice, and fine legal abilities, relates, that some years ago, Judge Hawley commenced an action which involved a very difficult and doubtful question of law. The papers required the most minute circumspection and research. They were brought to this lawyer for the purpose of interposing a defense. At first, he did not believe that papers could be prepared, sufficient in form, detail, and substance to sustain such an action, and he anticipated an easy victory. But on examination, he was surprised to find in the papers, a firm and substantial foundation for the cause of action; every objection being anticipated, and every point fully fortified. They were, in fact, the result of laborious study, the offspring of an accomplished legal mind. The action was settled; but the papers remain in the lawyer's office, and have since been used as valuable precedents.

Judge Hawley's character did not escape censure.

There were points in it which naturally drew upon him enmity, and even hatred.

As an enemy, he was bitter and uncompromising, and not without a love of revenge.

As a friend, he was sincere and undeviating. Unpretending and easy in his manners, with pleasant, even fine, conversational powers, he was an attractive companion. There was a sunny humor in his manner, that drew the young as well as the old to him, and which disguised his faults. In person, he was slightly above the medium hight, well proportioned and erect. As a speaker, he was calm, temperate, and logical. He knew how to enliven a dry theme, with a proper play of the imagination, and thus give relief to the fatigue of close attention. In the argument of a purely legal question, at special or general term, he avoided all florid language, and sought perspicuity and conciseness of expression.

In his domestic relations, he was a kind husband, an indulgent and liberal father. As a citizen, he was public spirited, sedulous to advance the interests of the community in which he lived, and reasonably active in all projects of public improvement. The spontaneous tribute of the members of the bar, and the public generally to him, sufficiently attests the high estimation in which he was held, and the general sorrow which followed him to the tomb was not only honorable to him but to the community. He died on the 9th of February, 1869, in the sixty-eighth year of his age. Some years previous to his death, Mr. Hawley united with the Episcopal Church at Hornellsville; and he continued in the unobtrusive and meek observance of religious duties until his death. Without parade or ostentation, he approached the Mercy Seat, asking in spirit and sincerity, that God would be merciful to him a sinner. To live religiously, he did not think himself called upon to give up the proper pursuits and gratifications of human nature. His views of the true excellence of a human being were large

and generous, and hence, instead of that contracted and repulsive character, which has often been identified with piety, he entertained the loftiest conception of the infinite Father, whom he approached with lowly reverence, satisfied if he could but touch the hem of his garment, instead of worshiping with impious assurance and canting zeal. Such was William M. Hawley.