The Sun.
London, England, 1838-04-27 00:00:00

PUOTI V. ROBERTS.

Mr. J. JARVIS moved for a rule to show cause why the
Master should not proceed to tax the costs for the plaintiff in
this case. It was an action of trespass, assault, and for biting
the thumb of the plaintiff, and for breaking and entering into
her stable. A Terect passed for the plaintiff, with one far-
thing damages ; and the Master, tinier the circumstances,
thought the case came under the statute of Charles 11., and
refused to tax the costs. He (Mr. Jarvis) contended, that as
the action clearly raised the collateral question of the title to
the stable in question, that took it out of the statute, and the
plaintiff was entitled to her costs. As there were many eases
of a similar kind in the office, he trusted the Court would
grant a rule, so that the point might be settled. Upon the
case of Parnell v. Young, in 3d Bingham, he was entitled to
the rule.

COURT —Take your rule.—Rule nisi granted.

SIR CHARLES WOLSELEY, versus SIR
FRANCIS BURDETT.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
Mr. EDITOR,—I see by The Sun of the 24th instant the
account of the treatment Sir Francis Burdett met with at the
hands of the HONEST PEOPLE of STOCKPORT, when 11E, and his
twin-brother Baronet," Sir George Sinclair, attempted to
show off as two mountebanks I
The honest Radicals of Stockport know Sir Francis Burdett
all well, Sir, as I do !_and therefore treated him as they did.
Now, Sir, for a matter-of-fact which, perhaps, will explain
their reasons for their conduct to this "ounce of civet." They
remember Baggerley, Drummond, and Johnson, about twenty
years ago, being taken up for some Radical spreo, and handed
off to Chester Castle. The assizes having commenced, that
mild and righteous Judge, Ban, on the bench as Chief-Justiec.%
of Chester—and although the " SPREE" was a bailable
offence, yet the above-named /tad Judge put the bail so high
that the three men could not find friends of sufficient mood;
to come forward in their favour ; and so, contrary to the
direct enactment of Magna Charts, were confined ill p. ison
for six months till the nett Assizes for want of bail! I had seen
an account of this affair in one of the Manchester papers, and
as I was invited to meet Sir Francis Burdett at a dinner given
him by the " Concentric Reformers" of Liverpool, I wrote to
Sir Francis at Kirby, in Leicestershire, informing him of the
above fact, and proposed to him, as Stockport was in his way to
Liverpool, to meet me there on his road, and BAIL TuE Not.
MEN 1 I got an answer from Sir Francis, saying ho approved
of every word of my letter, but FORGOT (!) to say whether he
would meet me or not. This did not snit me—so I at hitu
again. I told him I was happy he approved of my let4cr,
but somehow or other he had forgot to say if he would go; but
that as there was rio time for his Nsithre' answer, .1 would be
there and waif for 4jn! for I kriem evon then, twenty years
ago any man, and was determined to nail possihi?,,
But it was not possible—he was too slippery fqr r 4,4,44- he
never cacao !! I waited till the lastmgmen,t; Ml 4 then sent

for the attorney for the prosecution, and having stated the
case, offered to bail the three men myself; in the whole sum,
of, if I remember right, 250/. each. But the attorney re-
fused, and the poor men remained in prison till the next as-
sizes 1 There, Sir I The honest people of S!ockport of course
remember this LITTLE patriotic tale of the old renegade, and
treated him with the contempt they did. I should have gloried
to have met him fare to face there, and there would have been
such a shout of disgust in his ears as should have stopped his
travelling any further—for the applause of Reformers, at latlit.