The Express.
London, England, 1868-06-20 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.—,Tvxz 19.
After T.r Nisi Prise Sittings at Weetninteter.—(Before
tie Lord Chief Justice sad a Special Jury.)
1111 U ALIAS V. TEE DLILT TILICIPAPH.

After our report left,
The Lord Chief Justice, in summing up, said—l have ob-
served in the course of the rase, it divides itself
into two separate and distinct branches which must be
looked at in reference to different principles and inspine-
tieing, and which it is essential you should keep entirely
distinct. The plaintiff complains in the first place that in
a series of communications purporting to be reports of
what passed at the Court of Amaze at Brunch' upon the
trial in which he was the accused, and charged with mur-
der and forgery, an unfair and prejudiced report has been
published ; and in the second place he complains that
after his acquittal an ar title was inserted in the Daily
Telegraph commenting upon the trial and its re-
sults, repeating the accusations, and directly and
indirectly charging him with being guilty of mur-
der and forgrned are ery. lain
agreed
onlad to think that all the
what is the law applicable
cities conce
such a cause. Whatever might have been thought in
pad times upon the law, we are now agreed that a fair
and impartial report of the proceedings of court* of
justice, although as incidental to them it may embody
matter defamatory to the character of a particular in-
dividual, is nevertheless privileged. The public interest
and public advantage in having the proceedings of courts
of justice made public to the world, predominates we
much over any inconvenience that may occur to indi-
viduals having their names and conduct brought under
public animadvenion, and is so great as to justify the
sacrifice of private convenience to the public good; but
the condition upon which alone that privilege can be
maintained is that the report shall be fair, truthful,
honest and impartial. It nerd not be a report of every
word that passes at the trial. No newspaper, how-
ever large, could contain a full account of the pro-
ceedings of a protracted trial, and therefore, in giving
a condemned report, a summary or epitome of what
takes place, care must be taken that it fairly represents the
substance of what passed. A newspaper, under thiejire-
tence of giving a report of the proceedings in aeo of
justice, that publishes comments of its own or the writer's,
or incorporates facts that have not been stated or brought
forward in the course of the proceedings, but introduces
them of its mere motion prejudicial to the peaty,-deft It
at his own peril. Whether the publication in England of
the proceedings of a foreign tribunal which reflected upon
the character of a person interested was privileged or not
does not arise to-day, and I pass over matter commented
on by both sides. The lettere have been described as sea-
Rational ; but I should my they partake more of the
French style than the simple, sober style in which we are
accustomed to see the proceedings of our own court' made
known to the public. I dare say you may have
seen, especially in the French nowel*pers, reports of trials,
in courts of justice in that country, and have been struck
with the tendency which there prevails to dnunatise
the proceedings, so as to make the reports as effective and
taking as possible ; sal them reports are very much in
that style.
_Every one is here described—from the judge
on the bench to the jury, counsel, and witness; and in-
cidents which occurred in the trial are put forward in the
most taking and captivating language. It no doubt is
very attractive to the residers, and may possibly become
the style of this country ; but I hope it never will. Our
drama and literature is now sensational; and even in
sacred things there is a tendency towards it. It is the
style and temper of the day, and no doubt it is very
attractive to those who read the otherwise generally dall
proceedings of our courts of justice. But while it is attrac-
tive to the reader, it is dangemus in many respects. As soon
as a reporter departs from a simple and plain
narrative of what takes place he is apt to draw on his
fancy, and the reports, which should be as truthful as the
proceedings in courts of justice themselves are, become
tinged with the peculiar impressions which he has imbued,
and they tote their human% and authenticity. I cannot, there-
fore, help thinking, so far as our courts of justice are con-
cerned, we shall adhere to the simple, truthful, plain, and
honest mode of narration which is now in vogue. It is
not, however, because you may think this style of report-
ing is objectionable and in bad taste, that therefore you
are to allow any feelings of that kind to weigh at all In
considering the question, whether this is a fair and
honest report of what took place. Passing by, therefore,
all these matters merely of a 'sensational and somewhat
fanciful character, I will draw your attention to the facts
relied on by the plaintiff. His lordship then pointed out
the misconceptions, the additions, and the omissions
relied on by the plaintiff in the report, and observed
with regard to one portion of it that the writer
must have obtained his information second-hand. Mr.
ant Parry, whom conduct of his cases is charac-
terised by flurnese and candour' has put it to you that the
re porter who wrote these letters, and still less those who
conducted the journal, could not have been actuated by vin-
dictiveness or malice towards Risk Allah. I cannot doubt
that the reporter or the gentleman who wrote the letters,
after reading the acts d'accuration and hearing the open-
ing account of the Pmenreur-Ooneral, entertained an
honest conviction that the facts bore strongly against Risk
Allah, and wrote as he did without any notion of tieing'
an injustice to him. I thtt Serieant Parry went toe
far in saying, that at the time the articles were writ-
ten it occurred to the writer that the guillotine
or the galleys would remove Risk Allah from the scene,
and prevent the possibility of his ever holding the writer
responsible for what ho has written. I don't think such a
thought occurred to the mind of the writer. But while,
on the one hand, it is necessary we should uphold
with firmness the liberty of the
.press, especially in
reporting proceedings in courts of justice, which it is to
the interest of the whole of the public should be made
known as widely ea possible, we must take care that
those who discharge these important functions shall act
under a due sense of the duty they have to perform, and
the responeibility under which they exercise their impor-
tant functions; and if you are of opinion that, looking to
the whole of these communications, they do not convey a
fair, honest, and faithful report of what passed at the
trial, but that, yielding to the impressions of the moment,
end with the idea of making his reports as attractive as
possible, the writer has gone beyond the hounds of privi-
lege, and has stated that which is untrue and prejudicial
of the man about whom he wee writing, you are bound in
justice to say so. I now come to the stoned part of the
care ; vie., the article written in the Daily Teleyraph
after Risk Allah'e acquittal. And the first ques-
tion to he considered is, what is its effect
The contention on the part of the plaintiff in,
that after a trial which has resulted in the acquittal of
the accused a public journalist might very innocently
write that under the circumstances he had been a fortu-
nate man to have had his innocence affirmed ; and there
can be no doubt that a man might so write with perfect
innocence, and without the intention of prejudicing the
accused, but with the object of doing him justice. Such
an article would not be objected to; but an article
might he no written as to have the effect that
he had been so fortunate as to escape, not from the
circumstances being cleared up at the laxt moment,
but from hie being a very lucky man, and to the
advantage of his having a very ingenious advocate or, to a
stupid jury, was to be attributed hie escape. Such an
article is a matter for greet complaint by an bummed
person. The first question, therefore, yin
capable have to eon-
sider in whether the article is of the harmless con-
struction I have stated, or whether it was intended to
affirm the guilt of the man who had been just acquitted
by a jnry. Every fact against Risk Allah hes been pro-
mineutly put forward in this article, and it is fur you to
say whet was the intending effect, of the article. Does it
simply say that, under all tie circumstances, Risk Allah
was innocent,-or whether, notwithstanding that he had
been pronounced not guilty of the crime imputed to him
by the verdict of the jury, gists' as it would appear with
the entire approbation of the court, he was guilty, and
that it was only to the skilfulness of the defence and his
good fortune that he lied compel the couilemmitiou which
he otherwise deserved. If, however, you are of opinion that
the article bears the meaning put upon it by the defendants,
there is an end to the matter. But if, on the other heed,
you are of opinion the writer intended to affirm the
charges, you will have to consider how far it is justified,
under the privilege which the law wisely gives to these
who discuss matters of public interest, that an honed
discharge of duty, aresouptuned with an amount of care
and caution, and reasonable sound judgment, which ho is
bound to bring to bear upon the discharge of his duty, he
is privileged, though it might turn nut afterwards that),
was in error. His lordship, after haring minutely ent-
rained and contrasted the evidence, said —lt seems to me
impossible to think that Medley's death was anything but
• suicide; and if you are of opinion that the facts tend to
the innocence of Risk Allah, and a recklessness on the
part of the defendant, your verdict must be for the plain-
tiff. Raving settled that your verdict will be for the
plaintiff, you will then have to consider the amount
of damages. It may be that in assessing the
damages you may not consider a man who has been
charged with other crimes entitled to receive heavy
damages ; but du not let it go forth that because a man
who has committed some action which may have brought
him within the reach of the law may be pessiledswith
eeperfectieu impunity in respect of those of which he is
t, because it would neither be law, good sense, nor
justioe. A man. however, who comes into court with an
unblemished character may expect at the hinds c:Li.dstiry
a larger amount of damages than the man who is
the position at what Brabautia called Inge. If you think
the plaintiff i entitled to your verdict, you will consider
the line of defence, and if you think it has not been esta-
blished, but aggravated the charges against thic=ff,
you will take it into considerationru the s.
I don't blame their wishing to know Risk Allah's past
history, in order to form a correct appreciation of his
character. If they subject him to a cross-examins-
tion and fail, they do it at their peril, and if they fail
they only heap coals of fir* on their own heads.
His lordship having again pointed out the objectionable
parts of Use letters, and the onineions favoanible to the
plaintiff, in conclusion said—The press of this country
stands much too high for it to Is, supposed that iudividuids
ste attacked from motives of personal hostility. The
Daily Telegraph is read by a great number of persons, and
the tone and spirit of its articling, with some exceptions,
calmed be found fault with ; but the higher the tharatter
of the payer, and the larger its circulation, so much the
mere venous if there happens to be by some uufmtuuste
lip or oversight a departure from the general spirit Ind
tune of its language, so much the more serious to the in-
dv4vpal Ova 4 ioa4co, are too 69409F0418,