The Sun.
London, England, 1856-09-20 00:00:00

MORE PRESS PROSECUTIONS.

(Front the Daily Hews.)

Within the last few days we have had to carry on
a correspondence with the attorneys-at-law of
Lieut.-General the Earl of Lucan ; and it has ter-
minated in an announcement by those gentlemen
that they are instructed on the part of their noble
client to bring an action for libel against this jour-
nal for an article on the Report of the Chelsea
Board of General Officers, which appeared so long
ago as the 26th July last, but which was complain=
ed of only two weeks since. Always ready to
give reparation where injury is supposed to have
been inflicted, we pursued the usual, and, as we
think, the proper course, on receipt of Lord
Lucas's first communication, and informed his
Lordship that the columns of the Daily News were
open to any explanations or complaints which he
had to make. This offer was somewhat imperi-
ously rejected, and an ample apology was perehop-
torily demanded for the opinions we had expressed.
As, however, the article which they were con-
tained was of a very general description, and
treated of the whole conduct of the earlier part of
the war, we very naturally requested Lord Lucan's
attorneys to point out the particular passages in it
that were regarded as libellous by his Lordship,
and to inform us of the nature and terms of the
apology which Lord Lucan required. We did this
in order that we might perfectly understand and
fully appreciate the precise nature of Lord Lucan's
complaint, and so be in a position thoroughly to
estimate the extent of the repaaation he sought.
To this request Lord Lucan has directed a refusal
to be returned. He charges us with having libel-
led him, but he declines to inform us in what, or
of what the libel consists. Ho refers us to the whole
of an article of which nine-tenths concern other
people, as being throughout libellous of him. Re-
fusing to specify the wrongs he thinks we have done
him, he requires a most plenary apology, the terms
and language of which heleaves to ourown imagina-
tion, and, without even waiting to know whether
we will or will not apologise for an offence of which
we are refused knowledge, ho demands the
name, not of our friend; but of our lawyer. His
demand on that point having at least the merit of
being intelligible, has, of course, been complied
with, and in one of the common law courts of the
Queen we shall be furnished in precise and definite
terms with the language which Lord Lucan terms a
libel, but which the Judges of this land and a
British Jury may, after all, think to be a perfectly
fair expression of opinion on his public and mili-
tary conduct.
Conscious of having no personal ill-feeling or dis-
like of Lord Lucan, and having formed our judg-
ment on his conduct in the Crimea, and subse-
quently out of the Crimea, on data before all the
world, we are not at all inclined to shrink from de-
fending in a court of justice the opinions we have
deliberately expressed. If, therefore, Lord Lucan
means in our person to attempt to punish the
Press because, in thehonest discharge of its duties,
it has pronounced a judgment adverse to him, or
endeavour to repress that freedom of discussion
which Lord Lucan himself has, on more than one
occasion, publicly carried to an extent and licence
which itis not the practice of respectable journals
to indulge in, we are quite content to meet him.
We have no love of legal strife or contention, but
if through our means Lord Lucan seeks to obtain
the opinion of a Jury of Englishmen on the part he
played in the Russian war, and in the controversies
which arose out of his removal by the Queen, on
the recommendation of Lord Hardinge, from the
command of the Cavalry Division in the Crimea,
we feel that we haveagreat public duty to perform,
and however indisposed generally to appear as de-
fendants in courts of law, we will enable him to
take that opinion. Restless and impatient at Lord
Hardinge's twice-repeated refusal of a court-
martial to investigate the transactions which
produced his dismissal, Lord Lucan may have
resolved on vindicating himself, if he can, be-
fore a civil tribunal. If so, 'we shall at least
have a cause celebre with which to amuse and in-
struct thepublic. Of its result we have no serious
apprehensions. At all events, the liberty of the
press, and the right and duty of free discussion on
all public questions, shall not suffer at our hands.
For any verbal harshness of expression we might
have expressed regret ; but for the general judg-
ment we have passed on Lord Lucan, in his public
capacity, we cannot apologise, because we feel there
is nothing in that judgment for which an apology
is due.

It would not become us further to allude to a
matter which must be settled elsewhere, nor should
we now have biought forward this topic so promi-
nently if it had not happened that this attempt to
coerce the expression of opinion had been made
almost contemporaneously with the publication,
by Lord Lucan, of a little book under the title of
"English Cavalry in the Army of the East, 1854
and 1855," but which contains only "divisional
orders and correspondence whilst under the coin-
niand of Lieutenant-General the Earl of Lucan,
1C.0.8.," and is stated to be, in fact, the intended
appendix to a larger work. We cannot imagine
the " circumstances which have made it desirable
that their publication should not be further de-
ferred," but we presume that our noble antagonist
can scarcely object to our giving increased publicity
to a work of so much interest in his eyes. We
have carefully perused these orders and that cor-
respondence, and while wo find in them ample
proof of Lord Lucan's military spirit, and are
disposed to hope that zeal for the service of his
country was the guide of his conduct in the sad
affair at Balaklava, they yield, we must say, most
abundant support to the adverse opinion generally
entertained by the public as to the character and
composition of the Staff.
It is impossible to rise from a perusal of this little
volume without feeling that a conviction existed
both in the minds of the officers of high social rank
in theerienean army, and of its first General, that
they were a peculiar class to be specially cared for
and treated, and we cannot show this better than
;'..)37 quoting somewhat at large from the correspon.
dente contained in it. On the 9th of January,
1855, Lord Lucao, in a letter to Lord John Rus-
sell, complaining of his observations in Parliament
on the Es.laklava charge, says—
With many tfficers in this army, a sense of duty and
an ambition of professional distinction are the sole in-
ducements to hold commands of great responsibility under
no ordinary difficulties. How mortifying and how great
mnst be the disappointment of any swill officer, &c.
Now what does this imply but that there aresome
officers to be more considered than others by their
superiors and the Government, because a sense of
duty and ambition of distinction are their " sole
inducement to hold commands ?" Other officers
hold commands as a means of living, and as al life-
long profession ; but they are another and different
sort of people—their feelings are to be differently
estimated and treated. And this correspondence
proves that such was actually the case in the army
of the Crimea. Twice did Lord Lucan achiress
(once in June, 1854, and again in August, 1854)
letters intended for Lord Raglan's perusal of a
character such as we do not care to describe. To the
former of the communications lie received the fol-
lowing replie.4 and entreaties from Lord Do Ros ,
then high on Lord Raglan's staff :
Scutari, June 11, 1854.
My dear Lucan,—lf you requ re it, I will delivc-r
your lette'r to Lord Raglan, but if you leave anything to
my judgment, I strongly advise this letter being sup-
pressed. My opinion is, that you should go to Varna ;
and I shall press that opinion both on public grounds
and from private friendship. Unless I hear again from
you to-day, I shall not deliver your letter. Think it well
ovtr, and do not send itme unle,s you are convinced I
am wrong.— Ever truly yr,urs,
(Signed) DE Ros.
Well, Lord Do Ros did, from "private friend-
ship," press his opinion on Lord Raglan that Lord
Lucan should not beleft at Kulalie, as Lord Raglan
had previously determined, and of course Lord
Lucan, despite his suppressed letter, had his wisliekt
gratified.

Illy dear Lucan,—On my suggeei June 12, 1854ng this morning to
Lc,re Raglan the advantage of your being at Varna, io
sup( rintend the arrival and quartering of cavalry rEgi.
mink as they arrive, he agreed to it ; and you will there-
fore be so good as to hold yourself in rea-dine-s to pro-
ceed thither in a few days.—Faith fully yours,
(Signed) DE Ros.
llajor General the Earl of Lucan,
Commanding Cavalry Division.

Lord Lucas's second letter was addressed to the
" Ceannander of the Forces" himself, and it com-
plained, in the strongest terms, of the favouritism
shown to Lord Cardigan, and Lord Raglan's dis-
paragement of himself, notwithstanding Lord
Limn had " had the honour and pleasure of Lord
Raglan's intimate acquaintance during many
years." Now to this letter is appended
"Note.—The above letter wai withdraan.—LuoAN.”
Aare we have two of Lord Lucia's letters with-
drawn. At last, however, in September, 1854, when
in the Crimea, Lord Cardigan in his tuz n complains
of Lord Lucan to Lord Rfglan. On this occasion
Lord Raglan decided that Lord Cardigan was
ot wrong in every one of the instances cited" Bat
Such was the display of animosity bctfore him in the
correspondence, " which he bad pertivd with the
deepest regret," that Lord Raglan liumbiy appealed•J
to two officers of that class of his army with whom,
to use Lord Lucan's language, "a sense of
dut.v
and ainhition of professional distinction are the sole
inducement to hold conad in the follo _ .rnuis,, ' wipg
terms : •

---- -
The Earl of Lucan and the Lri of Cardigan are
nearly connected. They are both gentlemen of high
honour and elevated position in the country, indeptn-
dently of their military rank. They must permit me,
as the Commander of the F. orces—and, I may say,