Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1914-01-28

the jury that they must not draw in
ferences from the fact that Mr.. Ber-
ry did not testify.
The Judge read in detail Chapter
$50 which defines libel and who may
be held responsible for it. This shows,
as he pointed out, that if an editor or
publisher had caused to be circulated,
even though he did not do it by his
direct orders, he must be regarded as
guilty.
The Judge defined according to Web
ster's dictionary that ''brazenly''
means "impudently, immodestly, and
shamelessly;" protect" to cover, or
shield from danger or from injury;
.impeach," TO impute some fault or
defect, to impugn some charge, or to
discredit; "wilfully," designedly, inten-
tionarry. After giving these defini-
tions, Judge Connolly said it was for
the jury to be governed entirely by
dictionary definition, but that they
were themselves to take into consid-
GRAFTON these words as used in connec-
ton with the article referred to.
He spoke of the liberty of the press
and said that il must not be construed
as license, but that we must be care
full of the rights of others. We may
go to any extreme in discussing otr
own affairs, but must be cautious
when dealing with somebody else.
! Liberty of speech does not permit us
| to speak falsely of others. This re-
/ quirement goes farther than the ConE
stitution and is to be found in the old
| commandment: Thou shalt not bear
ess T.. ,ai,
Judge Connolly spoke at some length as
| to whether a criticism was or was not
made in good faith. There is distinc-
| ton between fair and reasonable criti-
cism and privileged criticism. Privilege
criticism may be defamatory and yet be
justified In the former there can be no
defamation. If the comment is fair and
reasonable there is no libel, but if 1t at
| lacks the business or character of per-
son it becomes malicious and is therefore
| libelous. The people are entitled to
know how their officials are acting, and
| how the money is being spent, but this
information should be given by fair crit
icism.
Reference was made by the court to
the famous case against Editor Bass of
! the Bangor Commercial where a criti-
cism of contractor was deemed justified
! by the law court in the interest of the
! people, but this had been criticism of
| the work done on Bangor City hall and
was not a criticism of the contractor s
character. Any public matter may be
discussed fairly. The question of the
privilege of the press should always be
considered.
If the criticism goes beyond the work
and attacks the person. the criticism un-
+ der the law of the Maine court is libel
Gus. If, therefore, the jury should find
! that the criticism in the Civic League
Record had been fair and truthful then
the respondent must be found not guilty.
Judge Connolly explained a constitu-
tienal provision that the jury is the
cases, and he had not power to instruct
/ them whether or not this article COM
planned of was libelous. That was some-
thing that the jury must determine.
Further instructions.
This concluded the charge of Judge
! Connolly, but at the request of Hon.
| William B. Shelton, counsel for DR. Ber-
ry, he gave them further instruction.
This was to the effect hat If the discus
sion in the Record, taken all together,
was a discussion of Justice Haley's work
and that this discussion melted Justice
Haley to wrath, then 1t could not be con-
sidered libel The wrath must be caused
/ by criticism of the person as an indi-
| vidual.