The Sun.
London, England, 1853-02-07 00:00:00

GENERAL BROTHERTON AND MR. COBDEN.

General Brotherton has thus handsomely terminated
the very petty quarrel between himself and Mr. Cob-
den :

"Travellers' Club, Feb. 3, 1853.
" sir,—l have this day received your reply to my lel
ter of the 29th ult.

"As my whole object in taking up your challenge
was to test your sincerity, which I have now done, I
therefore decline to accept your bond. But, of course,
I, nevertheless, still hold myself bound strictly to per-
form my part of the agreement--viz., the payment of
the weekly subscription to the Manchester Infirmary,
and I have accordingly directed my solicitor to wait
upon yours, and give him all the satisfactory security he
may require for the due payment of this subscription,
from this day henceforth, which, believe me, 1 shall
always feel gratified in paying in support of such a
benevolent institution, and to which I shall add a do-
nation of 51., transmitted to the treasurer.—l am, sir,
your obedient servant,
" To Richard Cobden, Esq."

" T. W. BROTHERTON.

EXTRAORDINARY WAGERS.

Apropos of Cobden's warrer, the Observer says :—" We
have in our minds a greatb many such " bubble bets,"
that have come to nothing, and all without the aid of
dramatic incident or effect. Instances are numerous
enough of such extravagant and hasteless wagers, full of
sound and fury, signifying nothing. There is one at
hand, so apt and appropriate, that we shall quote it here
entire—the more so, as it is not entirely foreign from
the question at issue, and that it reproduces, in the
language of the learned Chief Justice Lord Ellenbo-
rough, who was moved for a new- trial, the some-
what apposite statement that in these days French in-
vasions were annually threatened, and were depre-
cated weekly in every church. In spite of all the terrors
that are daily endured by timid or sanguine people, we
are not come to that yet. We are not yet past praying
for. Indeed, we have heard of no church—nor even a
Quaker meeting-house—where the invasion is deprecated
every week. The chances of war and peace are now
discussed in the United Service Clubs—not in the
churches or the conventicler. And yet, in the remark-
able case which we select out of many—and which is
here subjoined—the parties to the suit are a well-known
sporting baronet (of Yorkshire, too), Sir Mark M.
Sykes, Sire of Sir Tatton Sykes we believe—and a clergy-
man, the Rev. Mr. Gilbert, who, in spite of the weekly
praying in churches, had no hesitation in standing to
win upon the continued existence of the daring Emperor
of the French, Napoleon the First and Fastest.
The following is an accurate abstract of the case,
which will not be read without interest in the present
day. The time is 1812, and the scene the York As-
sizes, and the Court of King's Bench, at Westminster.
Before proceeding any further, however, it is but fair to
inform the reader that General Brotherton has declined
to "take the odds," as will be seen by his last letter,
also subjoined ; and that, therefore, the affair, as regards
the parties, is virtually at an end. The moral of the
case, however, remains the same, and is held to bear out
these observations :
"ABB ON A BET.—GILBERT v. SYKES.-At the
York Assizes in March, a trial came on, in which the
Rev. B. Gilbert was plaintiff; and Sir Mark M. Sykes,
Bart., defendant. It appeared that the baronet, at his
own table, in a dinner-party, during a conversation re-
specting the hazard to which the life of Bonaparte was
exposed, had offered, upon the receipt of 100 guineas to
!AY a guinea a day as long as he should remain alive.
Mr. Gilbert suddenly took up the offer; but finding that
the sense of the company was against making a serious
matter of a bet proposed at a moment of conviviality, he
said, If you will submit, Sir Mark, to ask it as a fa-
vour, you may be off.' This the baronet refused to do ;
the 100 guineas were sent by Mr. G., of' which Sir
M. acknowledged the receipt, and he had continued
paying the guinea a-day for nearly three y'ears. At
length he declined further payment, and this action was
for the recovery of the sum still due upon the contract.
"Mr. Topping, for the defendant, contended, first,
that there was no serious intention of betting on the
part of Sir M. Sykes, but that he was surprised by the
hasty acceptance of the offer by the clergyman. He
then, on the supposition that it was regarded as a real
bet, advanced an argument, that Mr. Gilbert, having
this a beneficial interest in the life of Bonaparte, might
be induced, in case of his invading this island, to use
means for protecting from personal danger an inveterate
enemy of his country.
"The judge, after stating the evidence to the jury,
with his observations, left them to decide the fact,
whether there was an intention of betting on the part of
Sir M. Sykes, and reserving the point of law. The jury
returned a verdict for the defendant.

" On 16th April the case was brought before the
King's Bench, where Mr. Park moved for a rule to show
cause why the verdict for the defendant should not be
set aside, and anew trial granted, the verdict having
been found against all the evidence produced. He
recapitulated the circumstances of the transaction,
and said that Baron Thompson, in his charge to the
jury, had treated the contract rather as annuity than a
wager, and, however hastily it had been adopted by the
plaintiff, put it to them whether it had not been per-
sisted in by the defendant. It was no wager that Bona-
parte would come to his end by -violent means.
" Lord Ellenborough, in granting the rule, said that he
was very sorry this question should come to be argued
in a court of law ; but unless there was in the nature of
the bet anything of an immoral or impolitic tendency, it
was a legal contract, and must be supported. He would
not declare what relief might be obtained elsewhere
under all the circumstances, but as the defendant went
on paying for three years, the fact of the contract seemed
to be clearly established, and the jury had certainly gone
beyond their province in finding for the defendant.
" The case was again brought under consideration
before the Court of King's Bench on .Tune 11 and 15.
After the counsel had held their arguments respect-
ing the nature of the contract, and the interest of
the parties in the event which was its subject. Lord
Ellenborough said, that although the Court might
differ as to the grounds of their opinion, they all con-
curred that no new trial ought to be granted in this
case. The objection to this wager was its tendency to
produce public mischief. At a time when the enemy's
threats of invasion were annual, and deprecated weekly
in every church, could it be said, that in the event of
Bonaparte's landing, the interest of 365 guineas per
annum to preserve his life was too remote ? Besides,
one great object of the nation ought to be to obviate
the suspicion of attempting the assassination of Bona-
parte, with which it had (he hoped unjustly) been
charged ; and to prevent a war of assassination, with
which any attempt of that kind would not fail to be re-
venged. He could not say that the verdict for the de-
fendant was proper on the ground that the bet was not
deliberately entered into ; but looking into all the cir-
cumstances of the conversation upon which this contract
was founded, and the contract itself, he thought the
rule for a new trial ought to be discharged.
" The other three judges delivered a similar opinion,
and the rule was accordingly discharged."