The Sun.
London, England, 1857-03-10 00:00:00

7HE LAW OF LIBEL.

(Prom the Times.)

The interests of society and the claims of the
press were brought once more under the considera-
tion of a court of justice on Friday last in the now
well-known case of "Davison v. Duncan and
Another." We do not desire to enter into details
which have attracted our notice solely on account
of the public interests incidentally involved, bat
the leading facts of the case may be recapitulated
in a very few words. The defendants were the
publishers of the Durham Advertiser, in which
journal there appeared a report of the proof e lings
at a certain meeting of the West Hartlepool Im-
provement Commission. This report contained
matter reflecting on the conduct of the plaintiff,
who thereupon brought an action for libel against
the paper, and the question raised the freedom of
the press in publishing fair, true, and correct re-
ports of public proceedings without responsibility
for the statements which they may contain. It has
been recen'ly held that the press is not entitled to
any such lib ,rty, and that it is liable to account for
any act onable matter contained in a speech re-
ported, al hough such speech may have been pub-
licly delivered, correctly and without malice taken
down, and printed in the simple discharge of that
duty which every reader of a newspaper expects to
see performe I. As far as regards the trial which
appeared yesterday in our columns, the result was
not unsatisfactory, for while, on the one hand, the
imputations of which the plaintiff complained were
disiproved, on the other the jury awarded only a
farthing damages ou the fir-t two issues, and found
for the defendants on the last and import int plea,
" beinglof opinion that the report was correct, and
published without malice." To the several points,
however, affecting th , great principle at stake as
they were brought out by the arguments we now
very earnestly invite the attention of the public.
It was not denied for a moment that the meet-
ing in question was a public meeting, and such a
meeting, in everysense, as called for the publication
of its proceedings. The Clerk to the Commissioners
deposed, that " their meetings were held every
etheteweek, and for the last year and a half had
been attended by the reporters for the press, and
the proceedings reported." It is also perfectly
manifest thAt the passage on which the action was
founded amounted simply to a report, and nothing
beyond, being a plain matter-of-fact representation
of words spoken and proceedings taken. It is true
that the plaintiffs counsel impeached the accuracy
of the report in one particular point, but, as Mr.
Justice Crompton very fairly remarked, " the re-
port gave the purport" of the matter, " and a
newspaper doee not always profess to give every
word of a document." In short, it appeared from
the evidence, beyond all question, that the Durham
Advertiser did truly perform the part of a public
journal, and did nothing more. Now, on the face
of such su hstantiation, we affirm that no liability
on account of any matter contained in the report
ought to attach to a paper, which is merely a
vehicle of information, and the functions of which,
in such capacity, are universally recognised and
turned to use.
Against such a view of the ca,se we have the learned
Judge's observation in his charge to the jury, that
" there is no obligation on the press to publish
matters of this kind, so as to protect them in the
way that a man is protected in giving what he be-
lieves to be a true character of a servant." As a
declaration of the existing law, this coincides, no
doubt, with what has been laid down elsewhere,
nor do we desire to argue the legal point afresh ;
but we do affirm that, morally and in fact, this
obligation has a real existence, and that, if a cor-
responding protection is not extended to those
who act honestly under it to the best of their
power, there is an end to the freedom of the
press, and to all the public benefits which that
freedom conveys. The free press of this country is
a fact ; that press discharges certain notorious
functions, and among these one of the most noto-
rious is that of reporting public proceedings. We
say that we, and not we only, but all the journals
of the kingdom, stand bound by the very terms of
our existence to furnish our readers with such re-
ports, and that if we failed to do so in any case of
public interest or importance we should be justly
held as defaulters as regar is a known obligation.
We say further, and without fear of denial, that
this system of reporting is confessedly to the ad-
vantage of the country. There is not a speaker at
any meeting, whatever may be his politics, his ob-
jects, er his views, who does not wish that weight
and effect may be given to his arguments through
that publicity with which the press provides them ;
and it is but common justice that in discharging
such a function we should enjoyprotectiou, so long
as we discharged it honestly. " Publishers of
newspapers," said Mr. Justice Crompton, "have no
more right than other pi-ople to print matter in-
jurious to the character of others." Of course not;
but when they print such matter not with the in-
tent or purpose of injury—not as the authors or
even the endorsers of the statement, but simply in
the exercise of a known and a beneficial profession,
and as repeating for the benefit of many what
was designed for all, but could only be addressed to
a few,—then, we say, they do possess more rights
than other people, and that such rights ought in
justice to be embodied in law.
A second objection to these views is also to be
found iu Mr. Justice Crompton's charge, where he
intimates that, but for the existing state of the law,
a sufferer under the circulation given to a calumny
by a printed report might lose his opportunity of,
redress. To this we reply that redress should be
claimed at the hands of those who did the wrong.
We abstain from entering into the particular case
which happened to be tried, but we affirm, as the
plain and obvious dictate of reason and justice,
that if the report of a speech carries injury to any
one, the speaker, and not the reporter, should. be
accountable for it—exactly as in the case of a
threatening letter the writer, and not the Post-
office, is chargeable with the offence. A public
speaker addresses his audience with all the liabli-
ties attending publication. He knows that he will
be reported ; he intends to be reported ; if he were
not reported ho would think himself ill-used, and
he should be prepared therefore to take the conse-
quences of the position he assumes. We admit en-
tirely that for wrong there should be remedy, but
we say that this remedy should be sought from the
ongdoer himself.
A third *argument against the freedom thus
claimed for the pleas is occasionally brought for-
ward, and seemed to be indirectly alluded to io
the speech of the plaintiff's counsel. It implies
that there is some d'scrirnination incumbent upon
journalists—that they ought to report some
speeches or parts of speeches or proceedings, and
not others, and that while professing to give an
account of what actually took place, they should
subject this account to certain modifications at
their own proper discretion. We make bold to as-
sert that t!iis ground will ni t be found tenable for
a moment. It stands to reason that a report, if it
is to be worth anything at all, should be a full re-
port and a true one. If it were otherwise; no
superstructure could be rased upon it, as nobo ly
could tell weether some suppression or omission
might not change the import of what was left. In

plain truth, it is utterly impossible that an editor
could apply such judgment to all the rep,rts coming
before him, and even if the nature of things did-
admit it, who, we ask, would recommend or
tolerate for one moment a system under which in
what purported to be a full report of some public
meeting any speech might he omitted altogether or
garbled at the publisher's discretion ? We cannot
affstot to consider such a point as admitting of
argument at all. Gross violations of public decency
we can, of course, exclude from our columns, but,
with such rare exceptions, a report should neces-
sarily reflect the proceedings in question with all
the simplicity and truthfulness of a mirror.
And now we will state in plain language, and in
half-a-dozen words, what is the real difticUlty, at
the bottom of all th:s question. It is this :—That
those duties of the press which everybody recog-
nises in practice are not recognised in law. There
is not a man who would not say the newspapers
"ought io report the proceedings of public meet-
ings ; in f tut, this very function follows in the shape
of an absolute obligation upon the existence of a
free press at all. When, however, the matter is
bi ought to the test of law, the professional func-
tions of a journalist are ignored, and the circula-
tion which in the performance of a well-known
duty he his mechanically given to an injurious
speech is represented as making him the responsi-
ble author of the injury. It is true that he may be
sometime—we trust very often—protected by the
manly justice of such a jury as sat at Durham, but
we, look to Lc.r,l Campbell and the Committee of
Lords for such an assimilation of law and reason as

COGLAN v, LA MERT.

(From the Times.)
That one half the world is ignorant of how the
other half lives is an old enough saying, which
would appear to be !Singularly illustrated by the
case of " Coglan v. La Mert," which was tried
on Saturday last before Mr. Justice Willes at
Oxford. In this proceeding were involved the son
of an English nobleman, a quack doctor, an Irish-
man in an indescribable position, and a horse
formerly the property of that respectable mem-
ber of society, William Palmer of Rugeley. The
action was in the nature of an interpleader to try
in whom lay the right of property in the horse,
which was called Gemma Di Vergy. We need not,
however, trouble our readers with technicalities,
as they have nothing to do with that with which
we are alone concerned—namely, the picture of
modern manners which is presented to us in this
report. The two principals in the transaction were
the plaintiff Coglan, a defaulter on the Turf, and
Joseph La Mert, who is described as a quack doctor.
The history of Coglan appears to have been some-
what as follows :---110 began life as apprentice to a
merchant at Dublin, but the tedium which attends
the operation of legitimate commerce was not to
his mind, fn. in the year 1835 he became affiliated
to the Turf. We cannot suppose that during the
first five years of his career in this speculative pro-
fessien Coglan very materially improved his for-
tune, for in the year 1840 we find bim engaged at
the Wellington Arms, at Strathfieldsaye, in a seri-
ous game of " Blind Hookey" with a young gentle-
man named Stratford. From this deluded indivi-
dual he wort a sum of 10,0001., for which he ob-
tained bills, which he endorsed away to another
dupe, from whom he received as value 4,0001. or
5,0001. in cash. The endorsee sued the young
champion of "Blind Hookey" on the bills, failed
in the action and lost his money. This transaction,
as Coglan said, proved to him a " great moral les-
son." It is to be regretted that during the next six
years materials fail us for au exact biography of Mr.
Coelan. In the year 1851 be became insolvent, but
most unfortunately, as he said, "through a techni-
cal objection"—tne man is an Irishman--his peti-
tio* was dismissed. He happened to be down at a
steeplechase at Liverpool in the year 1855, and
there he was arrested. When ques ioned by the
Court be was unable to give any idea of the amount
of his debts. They migh' roach the sum of 20,0001. ;
or again, they might not—he was entirely un-
informed—or perhaps, magnas inter opes mops, he
was too well informed upon the subject. He was a
defaulter on the Turf ; he had not so far back as
the year 1850, as he informed the jury at Oxford
with tears in his eyes, sustained heavy losses on
that debatable ground ! Despite of this series
of adventures in the year 1856, by some miracle
of good luck or good management, he bad a credit
in the hands of his bankers, Messrs. Retries, Far-
quhar, and Co., to the extent of 1,8001., and in
that year paid 6501. as the price of the horse
Gernrna di Vergy to the Hon. Mr. Lawley. Mr.
Lawley, as is sufficiently notorious, subsequently
got into difficulties. The horse was seized, as his
property, by the Sheriff of Berkshire under an
execution, and the question before the Court was
whether the sale from Lawley to Coglan was a bona
fide proceeding, or whether it was a mere pre-
tended sale, set up in order to protect from Law-
ley's creditors a horse which had so increased in
value as to be estimated at 2,0001. Mr. Lawley's
connexion with the case is somewhat more strange.
This gentleman, the son of Lord Wenlock, was
compelled through untoward circumstances not
long since to quit the country. Before the occur-
rence of this event, however, the Turf, like misery,
had made the hon. gentleman acquainted with
strange bed-fellows. On Saturday last there was
placed in the witness-box, as a person who bad
acted in the character of Mr. Lawley's confidential
agent, a street-sweeper, named Hamil. This exhi-
bition will, we fear, prove a heavy blow to the
" crossing interest." Mysterious tales have ever
been rife as to the luxurious mainer in which the
ladies and gentlemen who devote themselves to
this somewhat unpretending profession pass their
hours of retirement. If we remember right, the
tenant of the Bank crossing is generally supposed
to have married a lady of great personal attractions
and considerable fortune, and to have resided in a
genteel villa residence in one of the more polite
suburbs. Even the less fortunate members of the
profession are said to meet at luxurious supper
tables, and to laugh over their savoury rashers and
steaming punch at the credulity of the public. El-
derly street-sweepers of the gentler sex have died
upon mattresses stuffed withgold.en sovereigns. Their
outward poverty has been but as the ugly wall of
the Alhambra, erected by the cautions Moor to dis-
arm the Nemesis of his creed, and conceal the in-
ternal splendour, which might provoke the envy of
mankind. Mr. Hamil, however, the street-sweeper,
the confidential agent of Mr. Lawley, regardless of
the traditions of his school, made ostentatious dis-
play of his wealth. He carefully inspected the check
which was submitted to his notice with a gold eye-
glass, for he had been called by the plaintiff to
prove that the amount of one of the checks had
been paid,to Mr. Lawley. It is a somewhat novel
feature in London life to find a street-sweeper en-
gaged in Turf transactions, 'acting as confidential
agent to a nobleman's son, and cowing forward to
give his evidence in a court of justice with a gold
eyeglass. Time was when the betting-ring was filled
with gentlemen of high character ; but those days
seem to have departed.

LORD P.ALMERSTON- THE ELECTIONS.

(From the Daily News.)
The character of the representation of the City of
London in the next Parliament may depend upon a
movement which is to be begun this day. We allude to
the meeting of the London Liberal Registration Asso-
ciation. We have perfect confidence that the members
of that respe&able ,and influential body will assemble
under a due sense of the grave responsibility of their
task. The metropolitan character of the City constitu-
ency enables it to give the tone in no inconsiderable de-
gree at a general election to the other constituencies of
the empire. The character of the electors all )ws us to
hope, and entitles us t') expect, a fitting selection of re-
presentatives at their hands ; but any false or inconsi-
derate move at the outset may peril the whole prospects
Of the election.
From the men of business of the City of London,
whose extensive operations have taught theta to appre-
ciate the difficulties which impede or bias tbe transaction
of peblic business, and afforded them, rare opportunities
of scanning the haracters and motives of men, we are
entitled to expect a deliberate and judicious choice of re-
presentatives. Their proximity to the central scene of
political action, their frequent and intimate converse
with the actors on that scene, enable them to judge of
the exigencies of the time and the situation. They
cannot but be painfully aware how deficient the age is
leStlautaey. They have been taught
with perfect confidence
dinelmegenntetothwehnonmargtheeofpethoe p
feelingly that the present is eminently one of those crises
in which the clear views, the high principle, the sleepless
watchfulness, the unbending integrity of the members
of the Legislature, must compensate for the deficiencies
of the party leaders upon whom, under a Parliamentary
constitution, must devolve the task of administrative
government.
Turn our eyes in what direction we will, we find no
statesman of that commaidiag character which-men
instinctively obey and follow—falling behind him "like
waves behind a vessel under sail." Nay—let us honestly
confess the truth to ourselves—we have but one living
statesman who possesses that geniality of tem-
perament, that confidence in self, that tact and
boldness, which enable a Minister to form a working
majority out of the heterogeneous elements of the House
of Commons. Every Englishman will at once feel that
it is Lord Palmerston we are describing. Anti every
Englishman will at the same time feel that this acknow
ledged superiority over all his competitors is accompa-
nied in the noble lord by serious defects. Lord Palmer-
ston, plunged at his first emerging from boyhood into
the strife of parties, has ever since lived in tbat stormy
turmoil. Ever inaction, he has had no leisure to frame
comprehensive and foreseeing schemes of policy. It
may be doubted whether under any circumstances the
constitution of his mind would have fitted him for such
a task. It has been said with truth that Lord Palmer-
ston has no domestic policy, and those who have most
closely watched his career are those who are least disposed
to believe that he has anything that deserves the nameef
a 'foreign policy. His pococurantedisposition and indomit-
alle courage embolden him to let the morrow care fOr
andthe
adroitness things of i t itself,t
f,
nandee
r the
vessel
rel yu ponof the
his own
stateself-possessionclear
n
f
ab vi
his
a
unforese. a breakers. His good fortune and his invinc-
ible
confidencecheerfulness
st
rh
inspiredtath
thee
himself multitudefeels.
the
same Yet
all wary observers have often had occasion to shudder at
the narrowness of his escapes from shipwreck, and all
men of reflection and principle to be vexed and irritated
at the levity with which he treats every consideration of
principle.

Such is the man whom our necessity has made, and
will probably for some time maintain as the Prime
Minister of Eugland. In accepting him, we all feel that
he needs cloie watching. And we all feel that his dex-
terity, his experience in the turnings and windings of
political intrigue, his almost cynical indifference to all
opinions and principles, make bin one who may be kept
right in the main if he is conscious tbat he is acting
e 4 of men of intelligence, principle, and
jaunt:lde:
able
ee ey
determination.

this
sthdeay by key to the policy which ought to be ini
ti
members of the London Liberal Regis-
tration Association. They sre too sagacious to be carried
away by the cry of rally round a Minister who is in
danger. They cannot but perceive the danger of allow.
log, any election by which the people abdicate their
power for seven years to turn upon one isolated ques-
tion, or upon mere personal considerations. For the
aTtehdi'
next few years all will depend upon the characters of the
majority of the House of Commons. England needs
men of integrity and earnest character—men who know
how arduous are the times, and whose courage and
rectitude enable them to walk without shrinking
amid difficulties and dangers. At home, urgent