The hare-brained pseudo-revolutionary responsible for the gross writings in the Mylius case had the audacity to quote extracts from the American Declaration of Independence,[17] and other historic documents, to give the colour of respectability to his sewage rag. The present writer descends from officers who took part in the American War of Secession, the American War of 1812, and the American Civil War or the War of the Rebellion, but he can find no common ground between himself and the skulking anarchist who incited attacks on a harmless and worthy monarch, to wit, King George the Fifth. Mylius, the criminal indicted for the offence, affirmed the truth of the libel in court, notwithstanding the evidence to the contrary of witnesses of the best type. The marriage registers from Malta, where Mylius stated the marriage of the King had taken place, were produced, and, it is needless to say, no trace of any such marriage was to be found. The twelve months’ imprisonment to which the prisoner was sentenced was said by the judge to be insufficient. Indeed, it is an anomaly of the law that such an inadequate punishment should be the maximum assignable for the offence.[18] After the sentence had been pronounced, the Attorney-General made the following statement: “I hold in my hands at this moment a document, under the hand of his Majesty the King, from which, with your lordship’s permission, I will read. I am authorised by his Majesty to state publicly that he was never married, except to the Queen, and that he never went through any ceremony of marriage, except with the Queen. And, further, that his Majesty would have attended to give evidence to this effect had he not received advice from the Law Officers of the Crown that it would be unconstitutional for him to do so. That statement, my lord, is signed by the King himself.” The Mylius-James concoction was of a particularly vicious character. Had it been true, it would have left in the minds of ignorant people the impression that his Majesty’s children were the issue of a morally bigamous alliance. There is too much sedition-mongering already, to fill the minds of the benighted classes with fresh forms of doubt. Certainly, the King has enough to bear in the grave political unrest of the period, without being besmirched and libelled in his private life. As a last word on the subject of the King’s case, it is pleasing to note that no member of the London Bar appeared for the defence of the accused.