The Litchfield County post. [volume] (Litchfield, Conn.) 1826-1829, 1826-12-12

rs bitterest enemies, the Consequences would
not be very injurious to Mr.. Adams and his
friends. Our friendship 10 the powers that
De-" Is founded upon I'rinriple. and oar occa-
ss1nal expressions &c friendship We do q con
sider IN the least dsrogaiOry 10 our character
as an editOr.--S0 mucl'Ior o,,rleins tfe q. r.
doubtable champion Of the asin1inistration.''--
With regard to the principle of editorial re-
sponsibity which we advanced in our article
0tthe sCth ulh and which Dir. Goodwin thinks
new and ridiculous dottriae, we will say
we shall never so TO the editor of the Courant
Tor knowledge of common law principles. 1t
has often been decided in England, and very
Mcently IN one of the highest courts os the
State of New York, that the frequent reading
OF "A libelOus article from Ne::spaperi il, pulI-
lie places, renders the reader as liable as though
he had originally uttsrrd the libel: and 10 ca
ses of this nature heavy damages have been
adjudged against the person so offending.
Can then an editor of "a newspaper rcpublish
a libellons article, without note or comment,
and not be in the least degree liable for so do
ing2 Can one person write and publish a Ii
bel of the grossest, fo,tlest kind, which shall
make him liable to imprisonment and fine, and
the whole corps editorial OF the country re-
publish it without nOt;. or comment, with iml-
punity Strange doctrine, tllis--and as dan
gerous as it is strange. We said before that
an editor was accountable for SO doing, and al
though the Courant may deny the principle,
and ridicule US for advancing it, we are fully
prepared to repeat the assertion. The doe
trine that the bare re-publishing the article
from the N. Y. Enquirer, without remarks, is
no evidence that the editor believed them to
he true or false, and that this was to be jLs sed
of by the reader, is very erroneous one; and
I If the editor has advanced this idea as an ex-
cuse for extending the publicity of Mr.. Noahs
| infamous calumnies, we doubt very much
whether his intelligent readers win not consid-
or it a very lame apology But who is hest
qualified TO Judge of the truth or falsehood OF
the article in question, the great majority of
the readers Of the Cou,z,nt who do not have
access to more than one or two newspapers, or
the editor who has access to the best sources
of information in the. country! And what
should induce our plain g matter of fact far
mars and mechanic!Ss,-who are but little II
any acquainted with intrigue, and who gene
| rally depend entirely upon one paper for infor-
nation in political affairs, and that paper the
Courant,-of donbting the infallibty of the
article when given as fact by AN editor they
have wont to put confidence in We say Civ.
en- as fact, because not the most distant init
nation was given that the article might
possibly he the offspring of malevolence; hui
| otherwise it was appended to piece SO con-
structed as to render it necessary that such an
explanation Of the result of the New:York e.
lection should-be given.-As the Courant has
declared. itself not friendly to Mr.. ADAMS, we
Lave one request to make its editor; which
is that he would just intimate to certain ed
;alncighbour Of his that he does not OPP
! pose Mr.. Adams on account of his rank . fed
eralisln; = but that he has other and different
motives Cor his hostility. Such an explanation
may be necessary, since the 9"federalism of
Adams g. Co.''is the sim which smells SO rank
tOcestain democrats in the State ,ss,s