Mr. Serjeant Bosanquet now moved fora Rule to shew cause why this verdict should not be set aside, and a new trwl granted, upon the ground of misdirection on the part of the Judge. The Learned Judge, be submitted, had, in summing up the facts of the case to the Jury, intimated it as his opinion that the exhibition, of which the plaintiff was the conductor, was illegal; and in consequence the Jury had found their verdict for the defendant. He bad now to contend, that the opinion thus given by his Lordship was not correct in point of law. The Ltarncd Serjeant then proceeded to argue, that the exhibition in question was altogether harmless in itself; that no mischief could arise from its repetition ; and that it was no more objectionable than, exhibitions of fencing, or archery, or any of those other gym- | nastic exercises, the intent of which was to afford amusement, while they were calculated to teach the art of self-defence, the practice of which had never been questioned.The Chief Justice said, that he certainly had stated his opinion on this subject in plain terms to the Jury, and that opinion remained unchanged. Nevertheless, he was desirous that theJury should have given such a verdict as might have led to amore enlarged consideration of the question. Mr. Serjeant Pell, who conducted the case for the defendant, however, had very properly urged, that the Jury were the Judges both of the law and the facts; and they had, on a full view of all the circumstances, found the verdict which had been described.The Court then gave their opinion seriatim, that there was no pretence for disturbing this verdict. The exhibitions of which the plaintiff was the conductor, were in no respect similar to those to which they had been compared; inasmuch as the latter had never been the cause of prize-fights, or breaches of the peace, whereas the former were known to be the precucsoraof such obnoxious events. Matches were made, bets laid, and very frequently lives lost, as consequences of such scenes; and any