National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1884-07-25
The Bench and the Press,

A recent decision of the supreme court
of Massachusetts has narrowed the
grounds on which q newspaper can de-
fend itself in an action for libel by plead
ing that the alleged libelous publication
was privileged. It has generally been
held that the reports of proceedings OF
courts were privileged, and that no &C.
ton for libel could be maintained oven
If the matters alleged were false. The
decision in the case of Cowley against
the Boston Herald seems to put unreaa,n-
able limitations upon this doctrine. Tor
instance, II an attorney should file Pc
tition or bill in equity containing false
and scandalous accusations against any
one the real libeler is protected by his
privilege As counsel, but the news
paper that publishes the false
hoods which he puts on record is
liable to be mulcted in damages
for libel. The license of tho bar in deal
ing with private regulations goes unre-
bukod, and the whole penalty falls upon
the innocent newspapers which copies
the records of tho court and publishes
them, supposing the matter therein stated
to be true. This may be good law in
Massachusetts, but it certainly will be
questioned in many other states, and it
ought not to be the law any place.
If it were not for the publication of
court reports by tho newspapers q great
many people whose interests are imme-
diatoly or remotely involved would have
no notice whatever OF the proceeding
and would suffer for want of such notice.
Very frequently important witnesses are
brought into case by the newspaper re.
ports, and when all the facts disclosed by
the petition or answer are given every
one who knows any thing OF the facts is
put in position to assist in establishing
or disproving the matters alleged. The
newspapers in this way greatly assist In
the administration ofjustice. Whenever
an attempt is made to prevent the publ
cation of the contents of o paper filed in
court, there is good reason to suspect tina
something is wrong. Fraudulent divorce
cases are frequently smuggled through
courts by keeping oil mention of then
out of the newspapers. According to tn
law laid down in Massachusetts, the pub.
lication Of the petition or answer in SUI cl
a case is libelous, although the effect may
be to savo an innocent man or woman fron
irreparablo wrong.
There is u tendency on tho part of court
to berate tho press for the manner II
| which L. deals with the crimeg and weak
nesses of humanity which is not confne,
to Massachusetts,. Judicial lectures OF
the supposed shortcomings Of journalism
have been delivered much nearer home
and il must be confessed that there
often an absence of that discriminatin
moderation which 80 becomes the benc.
in these gratuitous harangues. or cours
these lectures are mere Obiter diGtdm, an
do not prejudice the rights of any ont
although the general effect upon societ
is bad. 1t is as great wrong to libel tn
press by indiscrminate denunciation a
il is to libel tho bench. The press canno
in its collective capacity maintain a
action for libel against tho bench, consc
quently the bench enjoys an impunit
which is sometimes abused. Judge Wyli
has libeled the press in several conspicu
Gus instances. His attacks have been un
dignihed and unjust and wholly uncalle
| for,