298 LETTERS TO THE &quot; TIMES V 



of its French &quot; Commissioner s &quot; present action. 

 But what then ? The upshot of all this is that 

 Mr. Booth-Clibborn has made as great a blunder 

 as simple Mr. Trotter did. The pair of Balaams 

 greatly desired to curse, but have been compelled 

 to bless. They have, between them, completely 

 justified my reliance on Mr. Sumner as a perfectly 

 trustworthy witness ; and neither of them has 

 dared to challenge the accuracy of one solitary 

 statement made by that worthy gentleman, whose 

 full story I hope some day or other to see set 

 before the public. Then the true causes of his 

 action will be made known. 



Paragraph 2 of the &quot; Commissioner s &quot; letter 

 says many things, but not much about Mr. Hodg&amp;lt; -s. 

 The columns of the &quot;Times&quot; recently showed 

 that Mr. Hodges was able to compel an apology 

 from Mr. Trotter. I leave it to him to deal with 

 the &quot; Commissioner.&quot; 



As to the &quot; Eagle &quot; case, treated of in paragraph 

 No. 3, a gentleman well versed in the law, \\lio 

 was in court during the hearing of the appeal, 

 has assured me that the argument was purely 

 technical ; that the facts were very slightly gone 

 into ; and that, so far as he knows, no dissenting 

 comment was made on the strictures of the Judge 

 before whom the case first came. Moreover, in 

 the judgment of the Master of the Rolls, fully re 

 corded in the &quot;Times&quot; of February 14th, 1884, 

 the following passages occur : 



