The Sun.
London, England, 1854-10-03 00:00:00

No. 4.

"Windsor, Sept. 23.

"My Lord Doke—l wal in hopes I should have been
honoured by a letter from your Grace in reply to mine
of the 22d inst. I now begin to have doubts from
your silence whether the explanation I have asked for
will be acceded to.

"AA the time of my embarkation for the East has
been fixed for either the end of this or the beginning
of next week, I beg to suggest to your Grace a fur-
ther consideration of the article of war which I quoted
in my letter, particularly as regards the following
words

" Or who, if such explanations, apology, or redress
are refused to be made or accepted, and the friends of
the parties shall have failed to adjust the difference, &c.'
" If, therefore, your Grace will adopt the concluding
injunctions of the article as regards the intervention
of friends, and will name one, to meet one to be
named on my part, I am willing to place the matter in
their hands ; and, as my time is short, if your Grace
will name London as the place of their meeting, an
adjustment in the manner contemplated by the Articles
of War may yet he arrived at, which I beg to press
on your Grace's early attention. • I have, &e.,
" R. GARRETT, Colonel 46th Regiment.
"His Grace the Duke of Cleveland, K.G., &c."

NQ. 5.

"Raby Castle, Sept. 27.

" Sir,—l feel bound to answer your letter of yester-
day's date, although I certainly never intended to reply
to that of the 22d, filled as it was in no less than five
sides of foolscap paper with the moat sarcastic remarks
reflecting upon my character, age, and military services,
which I choose to treat with perfect contempt, the more
so as I had nothing to add to my reply to your first
letter ; and by that letter of yours of the 22d, your re-
marks are fully as insulting and offensive to me as my
letter written to the Mayor of Windsor, and subse-
quently published by him, could, possibly be to you. I
will now come, however, to the nature of the offence of
which you complain. In my letter of the 20th I stated
that it was the privilege of every Englishman to criticise
and canvass the conduct of every public man in his pub-
lic capacity. That you did not attempt to deny, and I
cannot suppose that you would do so. If, therefore,
any one has a right to criticise the conduct of a Minis-
ter of State, he may surely do so with a commanding
officer, taking care that in either the one case or the
other he must avoid any libellous matter, which subjects
him to a penalty by action in a court f law. Now I
will unhesitatingly state that it never was my intention
to write a libel upon a man whem I not only never spoke
to, but never saw ; it was not upon a man by name
Colonel Garrett that I wished to reflect upon in his
character as an individual, but in his capacity as com-
manding officer, which makes him a public character.
The only question then at issue between you and me is,
wheeler I have a written a libel against you ; my own
impression is, that I think I have not ; but if you think
otherwise, you at once have your remedy by instituting
an action at law against me, and, if you succeed in
proving your case, I must abide by the penalty. This
is the only course pursued in the case of any libel which
I ever heard of, and if you think you can obtain a ver-
dict from 12 impartial special jurymen, who must in that
ease grant you damages, I should think it must be much
more satisfactory to you than the course you propose,
which may end most unsatisfactorily between two partial
men, and which, for reasons too lengthy to explain, I can•
not assent to. It is, therefore open to you, if you think
that you have been libelled, to take that course which
the laws of your country point out to you, and that can
be done by any friend in your absence, the same as if
you were at home. I must beg, however, that this let-
ter may put an end to all further controversial corres-
pondence, which can do no good; for if my arguments
fail to convince you, it is equally clear that your argu-
ments cannot convince me.—l am, &c.,
" CLEVELAND."