CHRONICLE. 



303 



and Mr. Wright, the brother of her 

 upholsterer, in a cause in which I 

 was defendant, in the court of 

 King's Bench. The detail of the 

 evidence the public prints will af- 

 ford. It is with me to state, that 

 my counsel, satisfied in their minds 

 that the jury would not, upon such 

 testimony as had been given by the 

 plaintiff's brother and Mrs. Clarke 

 alone, find a verdict against me, 

 did not comply tuith my earnest 

 entreaty (repeated to them in writ- 

 ing during the trial in the strongest 

 terms J thatmajorDodd, Mr.Glenie, 

 and other respectable witnesses 

 subpoenaed by the plaintiff and 

 myself, might be examined, as I 

 knew their testimony would be 

 founded in truth, and be in direct 

 contradiction to what had been 

 sworn against me. Under such 

 circumstances the verdict was ob- 

 tained. There only remains for 

 me now, before my God and my 

 country, to declare, that it was ob- 

 tained by perjjiry alone ; and I do 

 pledge myself to prove that fact 

 the earliest moment the forms of 

 the law will allow me to do so. 

 Anxiously, therefore, do I look for- 

 ward to that period ; and I trust 

 that till then the public will suspend 

 their judgment upon the case. 



With sentiments of the deepest 

 gratitude and reiipect, I remain 

 your ever faithfully devoted ser- 

 vant, 



G. L. WARDLE. 

 James-street, July i, 1809. 



4. Impressment and false impri- 

 tonntent. — James Sabine v. Sir 

 Christ. Baynes, James Godfrey 



He Burgh, and VV. Perry, Esq - 



Mr. Park stated, this was an action 

 to recover damages for an assault 

 ■and false imprisonment, under 

 very aggravated circumstances; so 



much so, that for the thirty years 

 he had been at the bar, he had ne- 

 ver witnessed one so dangerous, or 

 marked with such tyranny. Ex- 

 pressions like these were often made 

 use of by counsel, and juries 

 gave them only that credit which 

 they deserve ; but he pledged him- 

 self, that both his lordship and the 

 jury would think with him before 

 the cause was over. The plaintifF 

 was a young man, not more than 

 22 years of age ; his father was a 

 farmer, and dealer in horses, at 

 Hounslow; the defendants were 

 magistrates of the county of IVIid- 

 dlesex, gentlemen of fortune, re- 

 spectable characters for aught he 

 knew ; he did not know any thing of 

 them ; he did not mean to say any 

 thing of them out of this cause ; 

 but the conduct which produced it 

 was so glaringly bad, that it did 

 not require him to burnish it, to 

 make it shine with its full lustre. 

 On the 15th of October, 1808, the 

 plaintiff was left at home by his fa- 

 ther, in care of 30 horses, he being 

 obliged to go from home to attend 

 some horse-market ; in the evening 

 of that day, the plaintifF found it 

 necessary to take one of his father's 

 horses and cart to some place in 

 the neighbourhood of Hounslow ; 

 he did certainly what was wrong 

 and unlawful — he was sitting in the 

 cart, driving the horse, without any 

 reins from his head, by which means 

 the horse got on the wrong side of 

 tlie road ; he was met by Mr. De 

 Burgh, one of the defendants, who 

 said he would fine him ; on the fol- 

 lowing day, theplaintiff received a 

 summons to appear at Uxbridge on 

 the 17th, a distance of ten miles 

 from Hounslow : his father had not 

 returned home; but he went, and 

 look two friends with him : when 



he 



