The Alexandria herald. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1811-1826, 1823-01-01
THE RIGHTS OF EDITORS.

rights of editors Of newspapers, is de-
tailed in the N. York Commercial Ad-
yertiser of Friday.
A curious libel case occupied the at
tention of the court OF common pleas
yesterday, and is not yet concluded, which
excites considerable interest. The ac-
ton Is brought for libel on the plaintiff,
contained in private letter sent to Phi
ladelPhia, in which among other mat
ters and things, he is charged with be-
ing better acquainted with the art OF
putting his productions, than with max
ing them. In order to Justify this charge,
the defendant subpGpaed our WORTHY col.
league, Mr. Noah, and ourselves, to tes-
tify as tothe authorship Of certain arti-
cles, commonly called puts, which have
appeared in ourrespective papers at di-
vers times and on sundry occasions. The
sheriff this morning attempts little
pleasantly atour expense, which requires
some explanation. MIR. Noah was first
called upon to disclose the writer Of the
original puff in the Advocate. He said
he did not exactly know who wrote it
he might have written il himself, though
he did not remember, in consequence of
conversations with the son OF the plaintiff
we are all in the habit OF admitting
articles in aid of the cause Of literature
aud the sciences-many things get in
which are not editorial-however, as he
observed quotation from Shakespeare
in the piece, he rather thought he must
have written it himself. Our turn came
next, and the following was the result.
Mr.. .dnthon (for the defendant.) Is
that publication (showing us piece cut
from new spaper) taken from the Com.
mercial Advertiser
Mr.. S. 1t is. The article was pub
lished in that paper.
Mr.. .An:aon. Who was the writer OF il
Mr.. s. do not know, TO certainty.
Mr.. .fnthon. Who handed i, to you
and requested its publication
1fr. S. Under favor of the court, as
one Of the editors of free and indepen.
dent paper must decline answering that
question. IL is point OF honor and de-
licacy among editors, not to divulge the
names of confidential correspondence
The editor is alone responsible for all
that appears in his paper, and when him.
self prosecuted for libel, cannot BE
compelled TO give up the name of his
correspondent. In the present case,
however, it is not perhaps matter of so
much importance, as neither the editor
nor his correspondent, can be involved
IN difficulty; but 1t Is the principle for
which contend, and which | will never
relinauish. l am aware, may it please
the court, that the objection have taken
is novel one, as there has been no de-
cision exactly in point. But caDuot but
conceive this inquiry direct attack up
on the freedom of public discussions
through ths Medium of the press What
confidence, sir, can or will, exist between
editors and thei, correspondents, if the
former are liable thus to be dragged in
to court, and compelled TO surrender the
names Of their friends and confidential
writer's! Sir, the lawyers cannot be
compelled to divulge the secrets of their
Catholic religion be forced to testify to
the confessions OF those who commit TO
them their secrets. Why, then. shall G.
ditors be compelled, in this way, to dis
close the secrets Of their business, 10 de-
stroy that confidence which is reposed in
them, and the preservation of which is
of such Infinite importance to the com.
muDity9
The Court. There is no law by which
you can be excused. You must answer
the question.
Mr.. S. But, sir, if your honor adopts
this course, who, hereafter, will dare
come forward and boldly canvass the
conduct ofmen high in Office. however
corrupt, or the characters of candidates
for Office or popular favor, it their names
are at all times liable to be thus made
known TO the public Sir, the liberty of
the press, and the freedom OF discussion.
The Court. cannot hear any argu
ment upon that subject. There is no
law to excuse you. You must answer
the question.
Mr.. S. must decline answering it,
and abide the consequences.
The Court. 1 respect your feelings
and principles upon this subject but the
law requires that you be compelled to
answer the inquiry and it is my duty to
enforce obedience.
Mr.. S. again say cannot, consist
emily with my feelings of propriety, give
up the name, and am ready to abide the
consequences.
The court Then minated that we must