The Sun.
London, England, 1860-12-01 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Westminster, before
Lord Chief Baron and Common Juries.)
STOCKBRIDGE V. ELLIS.-ALLEGED LIBEL,

The declaration of this case stated that the de-
fendant, Joseph Ellis, the printer and publisher of
the Doily telegraph newspaper, did falsely and
maliciously publish, in the form of an advertise-
ment, the following words, to the injury of the
plaintiff :
" Scarlet Rifle Rangers.—The undersigned gives notice
that he is forming the above corps under distinguished
patronage. An eligible opportunity is thus offered to re-
spectable young men who, from feelings of disappointment
or necessity, may have left other corps It is hoped that the
sanction of the War-office may be obtained for securing the
services of Mr. Buuchier, late lieutenant-colonel of the Ist
Surrey Rifles. To get a commission make early application
to William Stockbridge, Esq., tailor, Kennington-green,
who will adapt old uniforms at a small charge."

The defendant only pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine and Mr. Garth appeared
as counsel for the plaintiff; Mr. Overend and Mr.
Lewis represented the defendant.

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine having called witnesses
in support of the case,
The Lord Chief Baron summed up the evidence.
He said—This is an action in which it is charged by
the plaintiff that the defendant published on the
31st of 'July, in the columns of the Daily Telegraph
newspaper, a libel contained in an advertisement
headed " The Scarlet Rifle Rangers," and it has been
opened to you by my brother Ballantine that the
plaintiff was engaged in what is called the volunteer
movement. No doubt this movement owes it success
to the energy, the devotion, and the loyalty of the
people, and we cannot allude to it without feeling
proud of the event, and not only proud, of it, but
happy and safe. Still I cannot but believe that if
there had never been such a thing as the volunteer
movement, this matter wculd probably never have
been heard of. It would be however for you to say
whether this publication, of which complaint is
made, amounts to a libel or not ; and, if you think
it is a libel, then it will be for you to say what sort
of compensation the plaintiff is entitled to under all
the circumstances. lam old enough to remember
when the law of libel was very different from what
it is now, and when that law was very differently
administered. Within the last 20 years an act was
introduced in the douse of Lords by my Lord
Campbell, the present Lord Chancellor, one of the
objects of which was to protect newspapers in which
paragraphs were inserted, and which accidentally
crept in, without, although there would be a legal
responsibility, the conductors being personally
chargeable with an intention to do a wrong. It was
by this act open to the defendant to say that he was
not aware of the nature of the paragraph to pay one
shilling or twenty shillings into court as the case
might be, and to plead that the libel was inserted
without malice or neglect. In this case the de-
fendant has pleaded not guilty. He has not availed
himself of the statute, and thus the law in this case is
left very much as it was before the passing of the
act to which I. have drawn your attention, and
which passed in the year 1842. You are left to say
whether this is a libel or not. I recollect when
ex-officio informations for libel were not unfre-
quently filed by the Attorney-General, but was of
rare occurrence now I recollect when indictments
for libel were frequently laid ; but that is now very
rare, and any one who reads the papers must be
aware that comments are freely made on the con-
duct of persons filling public 'situations, and that
these persons exercise a great deal of—l will not
say forbearance—but of discretion, in abstaining
from bringing
actions for libel, unless some serious
iejury has been done to their position in society,
and harm is thereby done. I do not say that, in
considering whether this is a, libel or not, you will
be governed by the question whether an action
could be brought now the libel in question. appears

in the form of an advertisement. I do not know'
that there is not something more in it than we have
any means of knowing. It appears that the corps.
of volunteers of which the plaintiff is the lieutenant
was to be called the " Scarlet Rifle Rangers," being
under the patronage of a most distinguished officer,
General Sir John Yorke Scarlett, the son of my
predecessor in this office, which I have now the
honour to fill. The libel proceeds to say, " The
undersigned hereby gives notice that he is forming
the above corps." The word forming, I may remark,
sppears in large type, possibly with the intention
of throwing a doubt on the propriety of a young
man in the plaintiff's position making' himself so
busy as to appear as the creator of a volunteer
corps, and then proceeds—" An eligible .opportu-
nity is thus offered to respectable young mere, who,
from feelings of disappointment or from necessity,
may have left other corps," as if this corps wus to
be a refuge for the destitute. (Laughter.) Then
the advertisement goes on to say :—" It is hoped
the sanction of the War-office may be obtained for
securing the services of Mr. Bouchier, late lieu-
tenant-colonel of the Ist Surrey Rifles." We have
no information who Mr. Bouchier is.
A Juror—l think, my lord, Mr. Bouchier had a
difference with some of the rifle corps, and that may
account for it.
The Lord Chief Baron—Neither of the learned
counsel for the plaintiff or .the defendant gave us
any information as to who Mr. Bouchier is. May
I state for your information, brot.her Ballantine,
that he is the chamber clerk to the Lord Chief
Baron ? (Laughter.)
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine—l did not know that
your lordship was aware of his military rink.
The Lord Chief Baron—Perfectly, and he was
made lieutenant-colonel in consequence of his
having written a most valuable pamphlet on the
volunteer movement. He is a most respectable
and respected gentleman. Some years since we
had an educational movement ; but I really do not
think that before that there were half-a-dozen
blockheads in the world who would not have
known that an advertisement signed " William
Stockbridge, Esq., tailor," was a hoax. (Laughter.)
Surely one would suppose it was not a serious
accusation that " William Stockbridge, .Esq.•
tailor," would " adapt old uniforms at a small
charge." One criterion of a libel is, whether it is
capable of being justified; but as far as I can tan
my ingenuity and my memory, I must say Ishould
not, if I were counsel at the bar, have the least ides
how I could justify a matter of this sort, supposing
it to be true. Is it a libel to call a man a tailor ?
think there would be a vast deal of insolence on
the part of a man who said, " You' libelled me
because you called me a tailor." It is no libel to call
a man a tailor—to say that he bears his share in
respectable branch of our native industry ; it would
certainly be no libel without an inuendo. For ml
own part, I cannot understand how the plaintif
can say the whole of the libel is untrue. I believe
several parts of it are true. The old idea of a libel
was that it was a thing which would hold a man up
to ridicule, and which would have a tendency to
disturb his feelings ; but a more sensible, a more
social view is now taken, and every mere joke to
make a laugh does not constitute a libel. Do nett
gentlemen, understand me as laying down any
principle for your guidance. Whether this is a libel
or not it is your province to decide. It is your pro-
vince and it is your right—it is your duty to do so.
Although I am entitled to give you my opinion, I
do not feel bound to do so. It has been stated that
Mr. Fryer, on reading this advertisement in the
Daily :telegraph, was disposed to turn the plaintig
out of his situation as clerk. If that be true, I can
only say Mr. Fryer is the last attorney whom I
should wish to employ. (Laughter.) But whatever
may have been the secret malignity of the person
who caused the insertion of the advertisement it must
have been clear to all who read it that it was a hoax,
The plaintiff, through his attorney, demanded all
apology and an exculpation. That was made the
day after the writ was served. It will be for you
gentlemen to say, taking all the circumstances into
consideration, whether. this is a libel or not, and if
you think it is a libel, then you will say what
damages the plaintiff is entitled to. I will levy
the case in your hands, with this single remark
The Press has, of late years, gradually become more
emancipated from what I may call the fetters of the
law, and if in the beginning of my address I said
something about the volunteer movement, I Lng,
at its conclusion, will say that to the Press, under A
proper administration, that movement owes so much,
and although you must feel that the volunteer move'
ment is entitled to our highest admiration, you must
also feel that the liberty of the Press has ever beet),
respected in that place in which you now sit, and
that this country owes to it everything, far above
everything, except to that glorious constitution
under which we live.

The concluding remarks of the learned judge
Wer' roooived with loud manifestations of applause,
which were immediately checked.
The jury returned a verdict for the defendant.

COUNTRY MARKETS.