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

THE LA W OF LIBEL.

(From 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, but
the leading facts of the case may be recapitulated
iu a very few words. The defendants were the
publishers of the Durham Advertiser, in which
Journal there appeared a report of the proceedings
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 allay contain. It has
been recently held that the press is not entitled to
any such liberty, and that it is liable to account for
any actionable matter contained in a speech re-
ported, although 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 performed. 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
disproved, on the other the jury awarded only a
farthing damages on the first two issues, and found
for the defendants on the last and important plea,
" being!of opinion that the report was correct, and
published without malice." To the several points,
however, affecting the 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
other week, and for the last year and a half bad
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 plaintiff's 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 does 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. vow, on the face
of such substantiation, 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 case we have the learned
Judge's observation in his charge to the jury, that
" there is no obligation on the press to publish
matters df this kind, so as to protect them in the
way that a man is protected in giving what ho 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 g 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 and 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
,I public interest or importance we should be justly
held as defaulters as regar :s 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, cr his views, who does not wish that weight
and effect may be given to his arguments through
that publicity with which tho press provides them ;
and it is but common justice that in discharging-
suck a function we should enjoyprotection, so long
as we discharged, it honestly. " Publishers of
newspapers," said Mr. Justice Crompton, " have no
more right than other people 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 in 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, shotild 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 ihe intendi to be reported ; if he were
not reported he 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
wrongdoer himself.

A third argument against the freedom thus
claimed for the press is occasionally brought for-
ward, and seemed to be indirectly alluded to in
the speech of the plaintiff's counsel. It implies
that there is some discrimination 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 discr'etiora. We make bold to as-
sert that this ground will not be fond 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 raised upon it, as nobo iy
could tell whether 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 urts 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 be omitted altogether or
garbled at the publisher's discretion ? We cannot
affect 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 difficulty, at
the bottom of all this question. It is this :—That
those duties cf 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" to report the proceedings of public meet-
ings ; in fact, this very function follows in the shape
of an absolute obligation upon the existence of a
free preys at all. When, however, the matter is
brought 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 has mechanically given to an injurious
speech is represented as snaking 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 Lord Campbell and the Committee of
Lords for such an ;Assimilation of law and reasonr
may give us a final and comprehensive security.

The new Easter piece by Mr. F. Talfourd is to be
read at the Haymarket on Thursday next. It is founded
upon the mythological story of Atalanta. Miss Blanche
Fane has a very nice character in it.

[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Jane Hallett, of Whitty Head
Friend
near Netberbury, Dorset, suffered for many years from
a bad leg. From the knee to the ancle it had severa
wounds, so that she was unable to stand or move about
the house. She tried a variety of means and applica-
tions, but without obtaining a cure. By the blessing of
Pots, ls. 121 d. and
God and using only three pots of Poor Man's
and taking three boxes of pills, she was perfectly cured.'
Dr. Roberts's Poor Man's. Friend,. for. wounds and erup-
tions
ls. 1.d., 2s. 9d
tions of every description, is sold. in
2s. 9d. each. His Pilulm Antlscrophulm, for all im-
purities of the blood, is sold in boxes,
4s. 6d., uls., and 2f2s. each, by all medicine vendor's'
throughout the United Kingdom and Colonies.