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. Poland, 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 he
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 andi2,
character of a gentleman in Lord Ranelagh's
position position could hardly the absurd
mischief seemed to have arisen fronnie
be imagined. T
to Lord
question put by Lord Overiotho
es u ssed
lordship's with
had refer-
Ranelagh (Question 1,320),5.w
It was quite
d i ng qcurelettlicoinsinlg,3l9,
ence to flogging vt
Publich° le. u np iree eo
re
evident in reasdiitingaitioism
had
wbeheinchdhisi
school • •
fthheiscioutflesc,te,i,vvotnoolu,l3d2oyou
apply the
rtehsaptetchtetsoubbjoeyct of cr.
thought such boys,
Whicho imme.
rheepaldyTesstetrhaotunthdeo ought to be
well flogged, a
sciaimat:lYrulfeoltioowtheed viothrnateeer force, and flog the men
who criticised
Ranelagh
a ela
gh4
a tgoodou officer out of his position ?"
L
ght Lord Overstone was not
serious in asking such a question as the last, and
answered it in the spirit in which it was put. Had
he inquired of Lord Overstone whether he was
serious in putting such a question, the answer
would have been very different, and would cer-
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 mierepresentation of those facts. He must
repeat that Lord Rinelagh, 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 on behalf of his client, that
he frankly and honestly admitted the wrong he had
done, and if he had injured his lordship in repute-