The Lancaster ledger. [volume] (Lancaster, S.C.) 1852-1905, 1857-04-08
FREEDOM OF THE PRESS


We copied into our last Issue, 4 portion
OF The remarks published in the Charleston
CtuTitr, in reference TO Judge Nithcr's
charge to the jury, in the case nf r. w.
Clubs VS.. +. J, Arthur and John Burdcll,
lately tried in Columbia. AS We under
stood them from The Courier, the charges
were rather Of n serious nature, affecting
TIE "frccdom Of the press and the charac.
ter of the press of this country generally,
not excepting tie press of this State
Judge w iihcrs. has since, through a card in
tho C~aroliniGn, rerudiatcd The sentiments
imputed 10 him by the Courier, aud has had
that portion of his charge TO the jury in
reference TO this point published, which,
some may regard, rs sufficiently explanatory.
We rcpuhIish lie part of his REMARKS, from
which the deductions o. Tie Courier seem
to have brca dramn.
THE Jury were instructed, HAT tie free
dom of Tie press VAS ~iuauguratcd by the
State and Federal Constitutions; that il
could not be invaded BY governments, great
or small, or by Individuals; that it was not
so easy To define the "frcrdom Of the press
though the right ito published the truth for
iustitiabie ends" seemed To be a correct
conception when applied to the law of H.
bel that perhaps Millions argument 0rccly
cited by one Of the counscl) against II cen
S0rShjp Of the press, The murder in embryo
of Il manuscript designed for the information
Of existing or of future generations, would
furnish Il good description o! the conslitu
tiunal idea of the "irccdom of the press"
Ohough the court, while #dmiring the tow
ering genius. of Milton and his iranScrndant
power of language, doubted Whistler the at.
tornry was right in charactcri&ing him as
the .gr"1ieSi and best If mcn, since it YVES
remembered that he served, with equal ia.
ciljty, .hr Cromwell ard the Stuart:) that
the freedom Of the press dill not consist
sOIclv, perhaps not mainly, in the pubIira
ton of newspapers. which, though they
must be free and unlicensed, seemed not to
hc, while the free partUritinn of books
through the press seemed 20 bc The special
theme of Miit0n's essay /; that the other
great man, (Jetirrson) whose name the ut
torncy for plaintiff had introduced. ~ the
"apCst,r Of liberty" 10 indicate the tights
of his client, had uttered "a terrible uhi,ippir
against the newspapers, Ia the eject that it
all the taIsChoOds IN them were cut ont there
would he precious little left, " hich. urrlIap,
Was the cbullition of momrntary irritation
or personal sru,ibitity but shat looking Mt
The scnr'ility and RIGHTEOUSNESS of the news.
papers of the United States. for some Years
past, the presiding judge inclined Ia the II.
tImcuts expressed 10y one "f the counsel for
the defendants. Ito Wit: that while the free
dom OF the newspaper press was moi to be
questioned, its RIGHTEOUSNESS, from the fall
import Of which that of this State should
be expected. was notorious ard worth, the
strongest denunciation } and the presiding
Judge avowcd that in view Of such licrn.
ti"usnrss Of the newspaper press generally
in the United States, and especially in the
city of New York, n question existed in his
mind, whether it had not. for five or six
years past, worked more harm than good.
Nevertheless, it was maintained that There
could not be amy restriction, 10y censorship
or ~liscnrc, upon what the press, or any Gifts
departments, should give forth"