The Sun.
London, England, 1801-11-16 00:00:00

KERSLAKE p. SAdE AND OTIIERS.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL said, that on a for-
mer day his Learned Friend, Mr. ERSKINE, who
was a leading Counsel for the :Plaintiff' in this Ac-
tion, said he could not .resist life application which
was nride for a new trial in this case, upon which
the Court ordered the Rule to be made absolute.
—The Motion was. made without the Usual con-
dition .of the payment of Costs of the former
trial,' and which he thought he was justified
in doing, on account of what he had no hesi-
tation in calling rniscondut in the, finding.. of
the. verdict. He apprehended that in such a case
the Court would not give the, Plaintiff costs, and
therefore .the Court made the -Rule absolute in the
terms of ir,.which said nothingacosts,. But altho'
the Rule was thus made absolute, yet the Attorney
on the other side was ple:aed:fei think himself wiser
than the Court, and insiSteVthat the Rule should
be drawn un,An the forni which is usual in cases of
new trials Of a common kind;
,that was, on payment
of the costs of the fortner,trialr.although the Court
had made the Rule absolute' in the terms of it.
Mr. ERSKINE said, he 'would explain to the
Court In.; a few words how;thii matter stood—
Mr. GARROW and himself,' Wiiii were of Counsel
for the Plaintiff in .thii:Adioni.having 'attended, as
it was their &ICY ‘td,attend,,th'ivhat' fell from
Justice LE BLANC; before: 00M this trial took
place, in his .address to-the Jtir3i-, and feeling, as
they ought,to feel, great•resped for what fell from
that Learned-Judge, whose opinion was certainly
against. the Verdia ; and apprehending that
.the Court would not suffer - Verdid, under
such circumstances, to stand, -they. had deter-
mined not to trouble the Court upon the subjea ;
and, perhaps, he. was too forward in giving the
point up, for he confessed that he had not observed
the manner in which the Rifle.,was drawn up : as
the case was entirely upon matters Of faa, in which
there was no point of law ; and as the verdia could
not be said to be contrary to the whole evidence,
since there was evidence 'on. both sides—and, if
wrong
,at all,, was only a wrong. inference against
the weight of the evidence. He had thought,-
hastily, that the Rule was drawn up in the usual
form, which was (as the Court need not be told),
a payment of costs; otherwise, undoubtedly, he
should not have given the matter up in the way he
did, for he did not so much as call for the Report of
the Learned Judge. He would now make a pro-
posal which might cut this matter short, and which
appeared to him to be fit to be acceded- to. Let it
be left to the diScretion of the Learned Judge, be-
fore whom the Trial took place, to say whether the
new trial should be on payment of costs or not.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL said, he should assent
to whatever the Learned judge should direa in this
particular.
Mr. Justice LE 'BLANC then said, it appeared to
him the best course to let the costs of the former
Trial abide the event of the second ; to which the
Court assented, and so the new trial was ordered
to take place ; Lord KEN VON observing to Mr.
ERSKINE that at the tirile be gave up the contest
for the new trial, he appeared to -his Lordship to
aa with great discretion.

1); and Published by WILLIAM ARP!IIGER SCRIPPS (of Horse-ii
FOI ,the Paper, Letters for the Editor, .erc, aost-pai

rerry-road, Westminster);
id); must be addressed,