II. Whether, therefore, granting Roscius to be himself _immaculate_, he is excusable for his notorious partialities to such a character? III. Whether he has any right to complain of unjust severity, in being ludicrously reproached with such partialities, by a writer, whom he hath treated, even in favour of that very wretch, with disrespect, with insolence, with injustice. W. KENRICK." * * * * * Instead of _candidly_ replying, however, to the above three queries, a very difficult task, indeed, to Roscius, he caused the Court of King's Bench to be moved for a rule to shew cause, why leave should not be given him to file an information against the author for a libel: which being granted of course, the same was exultingly announced in the following paragraphs inserted in all the news-papers: "Yesterday morning Mr. Dunning made a motion in the Court of King's Bench, for a rule to shew cause why an information should not be laid against the author of Love in the Suds. When the court was pleased to grant a rule for the first day of next term. The poem was read in court by the Clerk of the Crown, and afforded no small diversion when it came to that part which reflects upon a certain Chief Justice, who was present all the time. "Besides Mr. Wallace and Mr. Dunning, who are employed by great actor, in his prosecution of some detestable charges which have been lately urged with _as much folly as wickedness_ against his character, Mr. Murphy and Mr. Mansfield are also engaged, and the cause now becomes a matter of much expectation with the publick." * * * * * To these paragraphs the author judged it necessary to make the following reply, in the above-mentioned Morning Chronicle; almost all the rest of the news-papers, by the indefatigable industry and powerful influence of Roscius, a proprietor in most of them, being shut against him. The AUTHOR of LOVE in the SUDS to the PRINTER of the MORNING CHRONICLE. SIR,