File 3044. - J. Alexander from New Inn, to James Hamlyn Williams, ESQ., at Hertford Street, Mayfair [London],

As Mr. Davies was not retained as one of the counsel before the Committee, 'his' presence in Town was not necessary, but as Mr. Phillipps thought proper to request his attendance, 'he' should be paid. But there was not the least necessity for 'his' continuance in Town after the Committee has decided in favour of the Sheriff. Mr. Bold, a respectable professionable gentleman, left Town after the decision on March 29 to go on the Circuit, and he was not aware that Mr. Davies had been detained from the Circuit on the recipient's account. Pending the charge against the Sheriff, Mr. Davies may be paid to be a necessary witness to have been called to have refuted the charge, but he was entirely ignorant of the nature and extent of Mr. Phillipps's engagement with Mr. Davies. Till March 29 Mr. Davies's charge of 5 guineas a day does not appear unreasonable; after that, as Mr. Davies could not act in the capacity of counsel, the charge should be different, and with out detracting from Mr. Davies's abilities 'he' did not the writer's recollection give them any assistance as counsel after the 29th. 'He' will perhaps say that till it was intimated to 'him' by Mr. Phillipps that 'his' services were no longer necessary, 'he' was to consider himself as still retained. Mr. Phillipps should endeavour to induce Mr. Davies to moderate 'his' charge. Best respects to 'your' Lady.