The Express.
London, England, 1848-02-18 00:00:00

Mn intelligens&

ROUSE OF LORDS.
FLEEING AND OTHERS v. NEWTON.-I.I7BLICATION or
" Tax BLACK Lier."—INTIMDICT DIBSOLVID.—This ap-
pall against an interlocutor of the Court of Session in Scot-
land, prohibiting the publication of the "Scottish Mercan-
tile Society's Record," commonly called "The Black List"
(as containing the names of parties failing to pay their bills
and perform their mercantile engagements) was argued
last week. The facts and material points in the case
were on that occasion reported in this journal.—The
Lord Chancellor now moved the judgment of the house,
and after recapitulating the facts said the question
involved was one of great importance, and he hoped
that if such a question should arise again in the courts of
I Scotland, the judges there would consider the practice of
granting thou interdicts and the consequences of them. The
present practice seemed hardly reconcilable with the spirit
and object of the statute, which created jury trials in Sut-
land, or with the liberty of the press, such as was esta-
blished in this country. That statute (Id Geo. 111., c. 42)
had appointed a jury as the proper tribunal for the trial of
injuries to tne person, libel, or defamation, subject to which
alone everyone enjoyed an unrestricted right of publication.
If an injunction of this kind was permitted the jurisdic-
tion over these matters would be in effect taken from
the jury, and the right of unrestricted publication would be
gone. Hie lordship would not go into that point further.
Assuming that the jurisdiction of the Court of Session, by
way of interdict, or suspension, or injunction, was most ex-
tensive, he would say that, in this particular case, it had not
been properly exercised. It was made lawful, by express
provisions of Scotch acts of parliament, to register the cir-
cumstances of dishonoured bills. From the register the
appellants collected the name of the persons whose bills
were dishonoured, and had their list printed when this in-
terdict was issued against the publication of it. If the in-
tended publication had been a narrative or statement relat-
ing to the bills, the publication of which narrative the pur-
suer would have a right to punish by action or otherwise, he
might, perhaps, have a right to apply to the court to pre-
vent the publication ; but whether, under such circum-
stances, he could do so or not, it was clear that, in this par-
ticular case, the jurisdiction of the court by way of inter.
diet was sought to be applied to a matter the publication of
which was perfectly lawful. His lordship thought that
the jurisdiction of the court was wrongly exorcised,
and he founded his opinion on the circumstance that the
publication proposed was a publication of something which I
had been made, by an act of parliament, public property.
The acts of 1621, and of 23 Geo. 111., had the effect et giving
to the protest required by the first of those standee to be
made, the effect of a judgment of the Court cl
Whether obtained in a contested litigation by the ant=
of the court, or by the conduct of all parties, or by the
of either of them, it was still a judgment to all intents end
purposes, and was so reedgnised by the Lord Justice Clerk
en a part of his observations on this case. The question
came to this : was it unlawful to publish proceedings in a
court of justice ? Nobody could say it was. The courts had
again and again recognised the lawfulness of such a publica-
tion. But if the proceedings might be published, so might
the result of them ; for the whole was supposed to be the
result of a regular proceeding. The registration of theme
names to bills and notes was in the nature of a publication,
but it was specially. made for a purpose distinct from. that el
giving effect to the rights of the ponies immediately interested.
The acts which required the registration of dishonoured bills
and notes, provided means for allowing the public to be
made acquainted with the names of the parties registered.
It was deemed necessary for the public good to do so, and it
was necessary especially for those engaged in mercantile
' affairs, for whine security and nieces' -knowledge of this
sort was deemed usentiaL The appellants had proposed a
particular form of publication. What they did was only to
do that by a common agent which each and every one of
them was entitled to do for himself. They gave informa-
tion to the members of their association by means of a
printed book, whereas bat for that each member would he
at liberty to nuke a search at the Registry-office. On
this view alone his lordship thought that the respondent had
failed to establish any title to an order, which though
only in name an interim interdict, had all the effect of an
I ordinary injunction. The granting of each an interdict
was in the discretion of the court. In the exercise of that
discretion the court ought to have refused it. His lord-
ship, in conclusion, advised their loroships to reverse the
order of the court below, and it was accordingly reversed.