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 Daily 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 securino, the
services of Mr. Bouchier, 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
n,ovcment. No doubt this movement owes it success
to the energy, the devotion, and the loyalty of the
people, atli'd we cannot allude to it without feeling
proud of tht: event, and not only proud, of it, but
happy and safe. Still I cannot but believe that if
there had never beb'n such a thing as the volunteer
movement, this matte:
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 no.!" ;
say what sort
and, if you think
it is a libel, then it will be for yott:.tc!
of compensation the plaintiff is entatifd to under all
the circumstances. lam old enough t remember
o
when the law of libel was very different frt;ln what
it is now, and when that law was very differently
administered. Within the last 20 years an act w 0
introduced in the House 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 shillingsinto 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
injury has been done to their, position in society,
and harm is thereby done. Ido 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 appearo •