The Sun.
London, England, 1858-04-22 00:00:00

El PARTS SALISBURY M.P.-CRIMINAL INFORMATION FOR

LIBM.
Mr. Welsby applied on behalf of Mr. Sali bury, M.P.
for Chester, for a rule calling upon Messrs. Mills and
Smith, the regietered proprietors of the Chester Observer,
to show cause why a criminal information should not be
filed against them for a libel on the 20th Feb. last, on
the above gentleman. Mr. Salisbury stated in his affi-
davit, that he bad resided for some time in Chester, and
since 1857 ho bad been chairman of the Chester United
Gas Company, On the dissolution of Parliament, in
March, 1857, one of the late members retired from the
representation, and Mr. Salisbury's name was mentioned
as his successor. On the 14. h March of that year Mr. Mills,
the reputed editor of the Chester Observer, called upon Mr.
Salisbury with a copy of the paper 3f that date containing
an article relating to the representation, and said that on
Mr. Salisbury would perceive that he
perusal of which,
intended to support him as a fit candidate for the repre-
sentation of the city, and as he required capital to con-
duct the paper, he asked Mr. Salisbury to lend him 5001.
for that purpose. Mr. Salisbury at once refused. He
attended a meetirg in the evening, and was declared a
candidate. On the following week, the day before the
publication of the libel complained of, Mr. Mills again
calle 1 on Mr. Salisbury and stated he had made up his
mind to support bins, for which Mr. Salisbury thanked
him. Mills then raid that, in supporting him, he must
rely on pecuniary assistance in return for it, but that if
he, could not assist him he must go against him. Mr.
Salisbury declined to assist him, and informed Mills that
he must do as he pleased. Mills urged Mr'Salisbury to
re-consider his determination, saying he must
stick to his bread and butter, however much
he disliked Mr. Salisbury's oppsnent. Next week an
article appeared in the paper affecting Mr. Salisbury's
claims as a candidate for the representation, and from
that time numerous articles had appeared in the paper
not only attacking his public pretensions, but villifying
also his private character. In the autumn of last year
the gas company applied to Parliament for an act of in-
corporation, and in consequence of some objections made
to it by the corporation of Chester it was withdrawn,
and a subsequent bill introduced and passed in conso-
nance with the views of the corporation. In one of the
articles relative to the supply of gas it was stated that
"a more thoroughly practical convincing contradiction
of the untruths Mr. Salisbury time after time has deliber-
ately uttered to cram his detectible gas bill down the throats
of the people cf Chester cannot be given ;" and in another
part, " We know his practloed ingenuity for shuffling
too well to suppose that he will be at any loss for an
excuse for his conduct, however shallow it may be found
on examination." Mr. Salisbury, in his affidavit, denied
that he had uttered untruths in reference to the gas
bill.

Lsrd Campbell—ls that the whole of the libel com-
plained of
Mr. Welsby—Yes.
Mr. Justice Wightman—There is no corruption
charged.
Mr. Welsby called attention to Mr. Mills' statements
on application 19r assistance, and his subsequent con-
duct to Mr. Salisbury.
Lord Campbell said it appeared to him the charges
against Mr. Salisbury were unproved. Mr. Salisbury
bad acted most honourably i❑ refusing to accapt Mr.
Mills' offer. He did not see how the Court could inter-
fere by a criminal information.
The other judges concurred, and the rule was re-
f med.