New-York tribune., 1911-02-02

ance with the daughter Of Sir Mlchdel
Cuimc- Seymour. was refuted to-day. Ed
ward +. Myius the local agent and dis
tributor Of The Liberator" republican
paper published in Iaris. which revived the
tale last November, was tried on charge
OF seditous libel. promptly convicted and
sentenced 10 the maximum penalty OF
twelve months in prison
In pronoUncing sentence, Lord Chief JUS
tice Alyerstonc said that the punishment
was inadequate FOR one who had chosen
weapon for q personal attack on his majes-
" from the use OF which every honorable
man would recoil.
Alleged Marriage DisproVed.
The story Of the alleged romance which
caused the conviction had been current Tor
u long time, but 1t became specially irritai-
ing 10 British scnsioiities following hins
Georges accession. As published oy Ed-
ward II. James, editor OF The LibefGtor.
X set forth that during the lifetime OF the
Duke Of Clarence. his eldest brother, be-
fore George became heir 10 the throne, tile
future king visited Malta, where he iel
in love with and married Mary Eiizabeth
Culme-SeymoUr, eldest daughter Of the al
miral, who was then stationed at Maltd
as commander in chief Of the MediteTra-
mean squadron. This was supposed to he
in 1890 but the Admiralty records showed
that the King did not hold an appointment
or any ship which visited Malta between
the fall OF 1855 and the summer OF 1873
The marriage records Of the Island OF
Malta were produced to prove that no such
marriage had been recorded.
Admiral Ctilme-Seymour svore that his
two daughters one of whom had since
died. never had an opportunity 20 meet
his majesty. The admrals three sons
gave similar testimony, and finally the
daughter in question. VINO is now the wife
OF captain u. Napier. entered the witness
box and testified that she had seen the
King only three times in her life. on the
first occasion she was seven years old. She
saw him again at Portsmouth, "hen ne
called on her father. in lSeS. eight years
after the alleged marriage, and once asain
at q garden party, in 1913, on which occa-
sion she did not have q chance 10 address
him.
Demand for Kines Presence.
Mylius offered no testimony and did rot
examine the crowns witnesses. He con-
fined his defence which he conducted him.
self. to technical,ies, asserting that he
could not be legally tried in the absence
of his accuser The defendant is small
man and was nearly hidden among the tall
barristers representing the crown. When
he read Ions extracts from the law in sup
port of his objections 70 the conduct Of the
case his voice was scarcely audible. He
was treated by Lord Chief Justice Alver-
when Sir Rufus Isaacs, the Attorney Cen
eral. who led the prosecution, made MS
closing speech the prisoner was not spared.
His voice vibrating with passion, sir Rutus
nolnted his finger at Mylius and denounced
him as the circulator OF base libel. Inc
Attorney General concluded his appeal 10
the Jury by saying that II was not the
throne which required defence. but That
his majesty had sought the protection oil
the court e a man. husband ana tatncr.
The proceedings came TO c dramatic close
when. after sentence had been pronounced
Sir Rufu. read q letter from King George
in which the writer set forth that only
the advice Of the officers Of the crown that
such course would be unconstitutional had
prevented him from appearing personally IN
the courtroom and publicly branding as un-
trra the allegation that he had ever entered
into snv marriage alliance other than that
contracted with Queen Mary.
Punishment in olden Times.
II has been many years since prisoner
r.. b.e, tri46 IN this country under the
.-.t,,te invoked IN the present case. IN
o,5sn times the offence was punishable
,,..h bra,dine and the pilory. IN to-day S
TIA, +he government invited the treeSt pup
1ic,tv and the courtroom was crowded
when the crown called Admiral Sey'
--o,,r as a witness, he testified tnat tnc
daughter IN question. now the VIE Of
Contain %apier, ri the British navy had
rs,er eAer his majesty until 1898 when
tba Kin- called on the witness at Ports
~,ort,, His only other daughter died III
,ta5 and for three years preceding her
dts+b had been with her father at Malta
80 be was commander in chief OF The
Mediterranean squadron. The King had
~ ,.,si+ed Malta while his daughters we're
tLers and the younger daughter had never
sroken 70 him.
THE prosecution vas conducted by Sir
Rufus Isaacs. the Attorney Genera
as.ieta6 b. Sir John = Simon, Solicitor
General and Messrs Foylatt ana Muir.
o5r v,,r conducted the prosecution OF
Or, Cr!ppen
lrvI,us haA 10 counsel lie depended
enie1v on the assertion that private papers
which might be used against him had beer
vnlawfully seized and demanded their re-
turn. Tie demand was refused
Sovereign Barred from Stand
The defendant had also sought to have
.be King eubpenaed ss witness but
This was also refused on constitutional
grounds He then demanded the Kings
presence in the courtroom, asserting that
Se could not be legally tried in the abb
sence Of his accuser. Lord Chief Justice
Alv4rstone again ruled against the de-
ferdsnt saying that the defendant kne"
uerfectiy we'll that under the constitution
h!s majesty could not be present
The iherato4" IS d snall sheet pub
Nshed in Paris rs editor hci1c Edward +.
lanes who vas formerly q legal prac-
,itioner in the United States. He is said
70 be q relative ot Henry James and or
William James, the Harvard professor who
recently died. \ copy u this paper circu-
Iated in this country contained aneged sedi-
tIous statements and revived the story
which the Archbishop Of canterbury once
denied from the pulpit 70 The effect that
his majesty. while Prince Of Wales, con
tracted a morganstic marriage ~lth the
daughter OF a British admiral at Malta.
after the lormalities OF opening the pro
eeedings were concluded Mylius began his
case by demanding the return Of his private
letters. which, be asserted. ha1 been seized
in gross violation Of hi. legal rishts lie
then SAID:
Il wish 70 ask whether ;he King is pres