[Richard Almack, Suffolk solicitor and antiquary.] Autograph Letter Signed ('Rd Almack') to 'Dear Edwd:' [Edward Shepherd] discussing in detail the points in a contested Victorian will, and the 'contumely of the disappointed'.

3pp., 12mo. Bifolium. A well-written and oddly-entertaining letter, and an evocative piece of Victorian social history. From the context it is clear that the recipient and his wife have been accused of overstepping the terms of a will, and on this matter Almack begins: 'Furniture is very comprehensive, and would I think include Work boxes, Chests, & plated Goods. It has even been decided that plate would so pass! - Also plated would. | Under "bed linen," Blankets & Quilts pass. Under "Household Linen", Coloured Table Cloths & Doyleys would pass. Therefore I infer, that under the general term "linen" every thing falling under that word would pass. But I know of no decided case to this extent'. Nor can Almack find a 'decided case' on the point of whether 'Trinkets' includes 'a ladys gold watch'. His opinion is that 'it would not pass under that word or Jewelry'. He continues: 'A few weeks since I advised a brother, on amicable terms with his sister, to let the mothers watch pass without dispute, as his sisters husband thought it did pass as a Trinket. This is not exactly your Case. | As to the contumely of the disappointed you & Mrs. Shepd. may bear it with much less difficulty as winners. It is on their part, I think, very foolish, & unjust - & undignified, - as they have no fraud to alledge. [sic]' He concludes by suggesting that the 'numerous points' be included 'in a case for the opinion of Counsel, if they stand out, & you doubt.'