AUTHOR AND PEER'S SON.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 14157, 4 September 1909, Page 2 (Supplement)

AUTHOR AND PEER'S SON.

j ARISTOCRATIC JOURNALISM. A writer who has obtained some notoriety as the author of " The Unspeakable Scot." Mr. T. W. H Cropland, of Lincoln's Inn Fields, was summoned before Sic Albert de llutzcn at Bow-street Police Court on a charge of unlawfully and maliciously publishing two defamatory libels concerning the Hon. Frederick Waipole Manners-Sutton, son of Lord Canterbury. Mr. George Elliott, K.C. (for the complainant) said that his client was concerned financially in certain publishing houses. He was on intimate terms with Lord Alfred Douglas and the defendant, who were respectively editor and subeditor of the journal styled the Academy. Lord Alfred sent Mr. Crosland to the complainant, at his father's house near Norwich, asking him for financial assistance, to enable him to carry on the Academy. The complainant declined to advance the money asked for. The Academy, subsequently contained an article which clearly referred to Mr. Manners-Sutton. The references clearly showed the spirit in which Mr. Crosland wrote the subsequent letters which formed the subject of the summons. In the issue of the Academy for June 19 there appeared the following : — " Mr. Stead, if we remember rightly, made an effort some years ago to throw a very wide net in the religious way. His scheme took the form of sending an amiable Nonconformist minister to Rome with a view of roping the Pope and the cardinals and the Holy See generally into a concern beautifully and brightly denominated "The Union of the Churches." " A certain scion of a noble house, who in the intervals of exercising his feudal propensities is not above turning the nimble penny, has apparently come to the conclusion that in Mr. Stead's exploded scheme there may possibly yet be money. Consequently, it appears that we are threatened with the appearance of a new j paper, entitled, if we mistake not, the Reunion Magazine. . " The bright young gentleman in question is connected with two publishing firms, which carry on two different classes of business; for-while one firm, in which he is the principal shareholder, is engaged in publishing religious works and translations of various Christian liturgies, the other has gone' in chielly for dubious stories of a highly spiced character and anything else that will bring Christ to the mill without actually compelling the intervention of the police."

Mr. Elliott said that the complainant's solicitors wrote the directors of the Wilsford Press, Ltd., and pointed out that the complainant was not connected with the Reunion Magazine. In reply, the solicitor received a letter, signed by Mr. Crosland, in which he said :—■

"We don't propose to oblige you by stating that Mr. Manners-Sutton is not the gentleman referred to. Rather, at our own time, and when we have completed our investigations, we shall be disposed to say that he is the gentleman. In our view, Mr. Manners-Sutton is a person whom it will be difficult for reasonable people to libel. At the same time, if he wishes to make a fool of himeelfj we shall be quite pleaded to receive his writ." "SOUGHT IN' PARIS." On July 8 Mr. Manners-Sutton received the following letter from the defendant on the Academy notepaper :— " The Hon. F. Manners-Sutton,T—A fortnight ago we received letters from a firm of solicitors requesting us to deny that you were the person referred to in a paragraph which appeared in this paper, and threatening us with an action for libel if we did not make this denial. We replied that we should publish no such denial, and that we should be glad to receive your writ. The writ has not arrived.

" Consequently, I must conclude that the solicitor's letter was a> piece of bluff, and that you yourself are a coward and a poltroon, besides being a person of no principle. I sought you in Paris the other week, and found that you were at none of your numerous addresses. I shall be glad if you will give me an address in France where I can see you." Mr. Elliott said that this letter clearly contained a challenge, and might have loci to a breach of the peace. It was undoubtedly a libel. If the complainant had felt that he could have got a remedy in the 'civil courts, by way of damages, he would have tried it. The Hon. Frederick Manners-Sutton, in evidence, said that Mr. Crosland told him at Norwich that he had been commissioned by Lord Alfred Douglas to ask for a loan of £150 to finance the Academy, and he declined to advance the money. He had known Lord Alfred Douglas and his wife for some years. On one occasion he told Lord Alfred that he would try to provide money to save the Academy from extinction if he received clue notice.

Counsel intimated that this was the case for the prosecution. The case was adjourned.