The Sun.
London, England, 1867-07-19 00:00:00

ALLEGED CONTEMPT OF COUR7.

Yesterday morning an application was made be-
fore Vice-Chancellor IVood in the cases of Tich-
borne v. Tichboruc, and the same v. Mcstyn.
On behalf of the plaintiff, Roger Tichborne, who
claims the baronetcy of Tichborne, sbort notice had
ben served on the publishers of the Pal Mall
Gazette, Morning Advertiser, Timcs, Morning Post,
Hampshire Advertiser, Hampshire Independent,
Hampshire Chroniele, and Southampton Times, that
the Court would be asked to grant injunctions to
restrain them from publishing affidavits used in this
case, and they would be required to show cause why
they should not be committed for having published
certain comments on the affidavits.
Mr. G. M. Giffard (with whom were Mr. Druce
and Mr. Locock Webb), on behalf of the plaintiff,
submitted to the Court, in the first place, the com-
plaint against the Pall Mall Gazette. Having read
what appeared in that newspaper in reference to
this case, he said that the only object in making
the present application was to show that if persons
came forward to make affidavits, newspaper pub-
lishers would not be allowed to publish them, with
comments describing them as obviously false, ab-
surd, and worthless.

Sir R. Palmer and Mr. Speed, who appeared for
the publisher of tha Pall Mall Gazette, said there
was no authority for asserting that the affidavits
Which had been made in a case of public interest
might not be published with comments which did
not exceed fair bounds. With regard to what had
been said as to the prejudice which the publication
of affidavits
.and comments thereon
might excite
against the plaintiff, the learned counsel asked whe-
ther it was not probable that the object of these
motions was to produce an impression out of doors
in favour of the plaintiff. Affidavits had been made
on the other side by persons who admitted that they
never saw the plaintiff before he left England, and
yet they deposed that they were convinced that he
was the person he claimed to be. Was it unfair to
describe such affidavits as obviously absurd and
worthless ?

The Vice-Chancellor said the writer of the power-
ful article in the Pall Mall Gazette had expressed
his opinion with reference to this case, which had
not yet been opened to judge or jury, with all that
boldness which persons, under the screen of the
anonymous, thought they were entitled to indulge
in. Such persons had no responsibility cast upon
them, but those upon whom responsibility was cast
—the Court--ought to protect suitors from such
attempts to prevent a proper administration of
justice. Amongst other things, the writer of the
article in the Pall Mall - Gazette said he happened
to know seven or eight gentlemen who were
well acquainted with the plaintiff, not one of whom
had been asked to make an affidavit as to his iden-
tity. The writer showed the strongest bias possible
against the claim of the plaintiff, and the language
which he had used in describing the affidavits made
in support of the plaintiff's claim was exceedingly
improper, and such as the Court was bound to take
notice of.

Sir R. Palmer said the publisher of the article had
no intention of acting contemptuously towards the
Court, and he was ready to apologise to the Court
for any contempt of which the Court might think
ho was guilty.
The Vice-Chancellor thought it would be suffi-
cient to call upon the publisher of the Pall Mall
Gazette to pay the costs of the motion against him.
In the case of the publishers of the Times and the
Morning Advertiser the Court gave no costs, as
they had merely reprinted what had appeared in
the Pall Mall Gazette. The Morning Post having
published some comments of its own, the publisher
was ordered to pay costs. The cases of the Hamp-
shire newspapers were adjourned until further evi-
dence was given.
Mr. Roxburgh appeared for the Times, Mr.
Martin for the Morning Advertiser, Mr. J. Napier
Higgins for the Hampshire Independent, Mr. Sheb-
besre for theyouthampton Times, and Mr. W. W.
Cooper for the Hampshire Chronicle.

THE QUEEN'S HEALTH.—WO have good grounds
for stating that the absence of her Majesty the Queen from
public evening festivities is really due to the fact that agi-
tation, over-worry, or much talking in the evening is fol-
lowed by restless nights, most distressing sick headache,
and sense of great exhaustion.—Lancet.
A CATIIOLIC CHAPEL STRUCK BY LIGHTNING.—
On the morning of Tuesday the belfry of the Catholic
Chapel of Grange, near Kilkenny, was struck by lightning
and fell, breaking several windows of the building and kill-
ing a cm grazing iii the neighlvurhood,