The Sun.
London, England, 1863-04-22 00:00:00

The Libel upon Viscount Ranelagh

Stanton Meyrick, of 7, Queen-street, Pimlico, and
Charles Pignett, of 26, Queen-street, Brompton,
appeared at the Westminster Police-court to sum-
monses charging the former, " for that he did un-
lawfully and maliciously write, print, and publish,
and cause to be written, printed, and published,
certain defamatory libels of and concerning Viscount
Ranelagh," and the latter " for that he did unlaw-
fully and maliciously publish the same."
Mr. Polaad, barrister, appeared for the prosecu-
tion, and Mr. Orridge, barrister, for the defence.
His lordship was accommodated with a seat on
the bench, near his counsel, and the court was
crowded with volunteers and others anxious to hear
the proceedings.
Mr. Orridge, on the part of his clients, said be
would suggest that the case of Mr. Meyrick should
be called on first. He had had the opportunity of
conferring with his friend on the other side, and
had also spoken to Viscount Ranelagh, and he was
about to make a statement which would meet the
views of all the parties and prevent the time of the
Court being unnecessarily occupied.
Mr. Poland having consented to this arrange-
ment, Mr. Meyrick was placed at the table.
Mr. Orridge said that his client having placed
himself entirely in his hands, he would do him the
justice to say that he was there before the magis-
trate with the intention and desire to apologise to
Lord Ranelagh for any injury or annoyance he
might have occasioned him. He deeply regretted
that in consequence of his dismissal by Lord Rane-
lagh from the South Middlesex Volunteer Corps, a
dismissal which he considered at the time was most
unjustifiable, he was induced to circulate the hand-
bill complained of, which he now saw and felt con-
tained garbled statements of Lord Ranelagh's evi-
dence before the commissioners appointed to inquire
into the condition of the Volunteer force in Great
Britain. He was now convinced that those bills
entirely and grossly misrepresented the evidence his
lordship had then given, as every one would admit
who had read the blue book containing the report
of that evidence. He (Mr. Orridge) had read that
evidence, and could hardly conceive that such hand-
bills could have been put in circulation by those
acquainted with the real testimony given. Any-
thing more calculated to damage the reputation andcharacter of a gentleman in Lord ItTahneei Nief
position could hardly be imaginedo,
question put by Lord
° whichyer
had refer-
mischief seemed to have arisen
sftronme theto absurd Lord
Ranelagh (Question 1,320),
t was quite
refer-
volunteers.
ence to flogging teerdin question Ici e
evident in reading the prece g
d* '3l9,
public school • •
that the subject of oifnersitic had been
criistcluesissiendgwith
the
respect to boy
head master out of his offie,,lt\oowulhdic such boys oughth his lordship's
reply was that he thought
and
volunteer
questionuewnatse,e r
force,
o ree, 1,320, h h .to be
well Bogged,
officer out of his men
you apply the
ght Lordo(tvtld er s flogon e the
was not
vdaoihnl3rotd:cl Yirriietalifneco ieltslieeoad good followed
hhea edt
u
a question as
serious in asking such
it th el) position p"
and
answered it in the spirit in which
was put. Had
he inquired of LordsucOhverstone whether ho was
puttingserious in putting
a
would have been very
,diffequestion,rent,
an and
thewo u
ld answercer-
tainly not have given the slightest pretence for '
issuing these .handbills, nor necessity for the pre-
sent prosecution, arising out of that garbled and
gross misrepresentation of those facts. He must
repeat that Lord Ranelagh, replying in the spirit
in which the question was put, had answered it
more fully than he otherwise would have done;
but it had never for a moment entered his mind
about the difficulty of flogging volunteers, or the
notion of flogging volunteers at all. He (Mr. Or-
ridge) must again say ou behalf of his client, that
he frankly and honestly admitted the wrong he had
done, and if he had injured his lordship in repute-