The Sun.
London, England, 1869-06-28 00:00:00

duction was accompanied by a short article which
lacked nothing in flavour, however defective it
might be in point of taste ; and when Mr.
CADOGAN was elected, the accusations against
him were repeated in a letter to the editor, which
also left nothing to be wished on the score of
vigorous language. For the injury done him by the
publication of the mock pamphlet, the article, and the
letter the member for Cricklade has been awarded
£2O. The sum does indeed appear inadequate;
but a short résumé of the facts will serve to shew
why the jury did not allow more, and why many
juries would have hesitated before pronouncing for
so much. In the first place, Mr. CADOGAN was
represented by the election address to have employed
his position as deputy-chairman of the Submarine
Telegraph Company—au office which he filled from
1852 to 1857—in illicitly ascertaining the contents
of messages, and using the information they
furnished as a guide in Stock Exchange
speculations. The facts which the plaintiff
was bound to admit were, to say the least, an
unfortunate series of coincidences. It was proved
that Mr. CADOGAN did speculate to a considerable
extent whilst a director of the telegraph company.
It was likewise not contested that the member for
Cricklade was during this period constantly engaged
in the instrument-room of the telegraph offices. It
is not usual for directors to spend much of their
time with a company's clerks, but this excessive
zeal is explained by the theory that Mr.
CADOGAN was perfectly acquainted with the
art of telegraphy, and was able to translate
foreign messages. The clerks, however, soon
became proficient, and a knowledge of lan-
guages is not now-a-days usually confined to
directors. But still Mr. CA-DOGAN deemed his
presence indispensable to the conduct of business
at the Cornhill offices ; and, moreover, he adopted
another system of procedure which scarcely admits
of even this explanation. He gave orders that pri-
vate messages containing certain information should
be sent to him at his club. It is difficult to
see why telegrams, which ought to be as sacred as
letters, should have been submitted to Mr.CADOGAN'S
inspection before proceeding to its destination ; still
less is it clear why one important message was
published before it was received in the quarter to
which it was addressed. Yet the plaintiff could not
disprove that these things were done, nor is there
any doubt that during the exercise of this espionage
Mr. CADOGAN was largely buying and selling stocks.
In 1857 Mr. CADOGAN prosecuted a 3.1 r. EVANS
and a Captain THORNE on a charge of attempting to
extort money from him as the price of suppressing
a letter sent to the Times. The two culprits were
sent to prison for twelve months; but the letter in
question referred to Mr. CADOGAN'S position in the
Telegraph Company, and the trial created such a
scandal that he resigned. Whether EVANS and
THORNE were unjustly convicted is a painful ques-
tion into which we need not enter. The facts we have
given, respecting which there is no dispute whatever,
may suffice to indicate whether Mr. C ADOGAN' s conduct
whilst deputy-chairman of the Submarine Company
is wholly free from blame. The mock election
address contained another charge. It was to the
effect that in 1862, whilst Mr. CADOGAN held an
important office under the Commissioners of the
International Exhibition, he procured a refreshment
contract for a Frenchman named VEILLARD, re-
ceiving a " consideration" in return. Here the
North Wilts Herald fell into error, for it was
shewn that the plaintiff held no office, and Earl
GRANVILLE testified that Mr. CADOGAN exerted no
personal influence with him. M. VEILLARD, how-
ever, got the contract, and Mr. CADOGAN got a
certain sum of money. But admitting that this portion
of the election address was a libel without justification,
the whole verdict is not intelligible to us, and Mr.
Justice HANNEN shewed pretty clearly that it was
not intelligible to him. For the jury found for the
plaintiff on both the charges—the telegraph manipu-
lation, as well as the refreshment contract.
Twenty pounds would have been no great sum as
damages for the paragraph about the VEILLARD affair
if the jury felt satisfied that it was libellous;
but, by making their verdict apply to both
cases, they absolve Mr. CADOGAN from blame in the
one equally with the other. The public will be
able to form its own judgment from the facts. There
can be but one conclusion from such a story. The
language used by the North, Wilts Herald
was certainly not too mild, and the prac-
tice of concocting squibs in the shape of
false election addresses is one which cannot be
applauded. But this does not alter the facts as they
apply to Mr. CADOGAN. The question of whether
he ought to represent Cricklade after this exposure
admits of a very easy answer.