Untitled

Anglo-Maori Warder, Volume 1, Issue 1, 25 April 1848, Page 1

The following address of Mr. Justice a' Beckett, together with the observations with which it is prefaced in the Port Philip Herald, has reached us most opportunely for insertion in this, the first number of our Journal. In it will be found, better and more forcibly than we could have worded them, our own settled convictions with regard to the state of the Colonial press. THE LIBERTY OF THE PRESS. Subjoined will be found a correct report of the address delivered by his Honor the Resident Judge, in passing sentence upon Samuel Goode, on Friday last, and sorry are we that the state of the Press here rendered such observations necessary. With their general tenor, however, we perfectly coincide ; the press must be kept under a proper restraint; subjected to a legitimate discipline; and regulated by public opi. nion,—if it is to produce those great public bedefits which are expected from its pages. A high toned, independent, and un-personal press is a blessing to any community ; a private, vindictive, and unprincipled journal is a nuisance. The remarks of his honor are particularly applicable to the greater portion of the press of this province, for here, singular to say, the ho nourable profession of a journalist is in many instances degraded to the level of the greatest ruffian who walks the streets. Journalism and blackguardism have almost become synonimous, and the prints which are daily witnessed and read are so many circulating poisons, communicating their deleterious influance and contaminating the whole social system. It is high time then, that this career should be stopped, that the province should be relieved of the plague spot which infects it. The issue of last week has done a great deal towards such a consummation ; two libellers of private character have been tried, convicted, and punished ; and their fate will no doubt exercise a salutary influence on the conduct of others, who vilely persist in following in their disgraceful track. Mr Justice a'Beckett's address will be read

with much interest, and receive a hearty response from every right-minded man, embodying as it does, a sound review of the line of conduct which a public writer should adopt ;—- it was to the following effect : - " Samuel Goode—You have been found guilty of publishing in the Albion newspaper, of which you are the publisher and proprietor, a libel reflecting on the character of Sidney Stephen, Esq., in his capacity of a magistrate. In reference to his attendance at the police office on a particular occasion, the libel thus remarks—" What right the latter gentleman had to interfere in a Town case, seeing that he is not a Town Magistrate, we are at a loss to conceive; the motive, however, we are not at a loss to trace, and a base, contemptible motive it was, for it was no other than to gratify a petty feeling of personal hostility towards Curtis, by preventing him if possible from obtaining tbat justice to which he was entitled ; and an equally despicable and dishonourable feeling prompted the attendance of the remaining trio, all of whom, in colonial parlance, had a 'heavy down' upon the complainant." Language more offensive could hardly have been used, and no imputation more gross can well be conceived, on the conduct of a magistrate, than that which is here conveyed. It is no insinuation, but a direct charge of an attempt by Mr. Stephen to use his magisterial powers for the express pu pose of preventing the ends of justice in a particular case, and that out of vindictive feelings towards the party concerned. This most disgrace'ul paragraph is sent forth to the world in a public newspaper, of which, it appears from the affidavit your counsel has just handed in, you are co-editor and manager iu conjunction with two other persons. You say that you objected, yourself, to the admission of the article containing the libel, but were overruled by the other two, and that it accordingly obtained insertion against your consent. It appears, too, from the affidavit of your Reporter Curtis, that he was the author of the article. But what right had you to be overruled in a matter where; your own conscience was concerned, and for the consequences of which you alone were responsible; or, if you were so fettered that you could not prevent its publication, could you not have taken some public means of setting yourself right with the gentleman against whom it was levelled, or of expressing your regret for its insertion? But l am sorry to observe that even in your affidavit, filed this day, you express no contrition whatever for the publication of the libel; not a word of sorrow for the slander which you have permitted to go forth, or of disclaimer, on your part, of the imputations which are there conveyed. You must have seen, from the whole tenor of the article, that it was the very last that a respectable editor ought to have suffered to appear in his paper. And here let me say a few words in reference to the colonial Press in general; a Press which, I observe, arrogates to itself all the attributes and privileges of what is, in England, so justly denominated " the fourth estate," without submitting to any of those wholesome restraints by wh ch that " estate" has at once secured its freedom, established its influence, and extended its power. Well may the Press be termed "a fourth estate" in a country where, with the exception of a few papers of infamous notoriety, the people are accustomed not only to consider it as the best guardian of their political rights, but their great expounder and. advocate in all that concerns their social and moral; interests ; and to see in it a tribunal before which the mightiest may be made to tremb'e, and the meanest be sure of finding a shelter and redress. But the Press of the Mother Country is not, as in this, confined to newspapers as its organ and channel; it has a thousand other sources, which are closed, or rather are yet to be opened, in a colony like this. But until that can take place how impor ant is it that our Newspaper Press should be honorably conducted, and in the hands of those who will seek rather to render it a blessing, than a curse. I have no desire to deny the ability that is often manifested in our Newspaper Press. But it is impossible not to observe that this ability is too often exhausted on unworthy subjects ; and yet, what a variety of themes, is open to the Colonial Press, in which we are all deeply interested, without touch ng on those which only bespeak party spirit, or individual hate. Where is it, if not in our Newspapers, that [?] our great interests (or great they are to us) are to be agitated ; our political controversies to be carried on our questions of art, literature, and science, discu-sed ? The colonial newspaper is at once a News Journal, Magazine, Review, and Law Reporter ; and there are times when we might find, in the same sheet, an original novel—a moral and even a poleme [?] discourse A publication of a character- so heterogeneous to be edited worthily, requires more talent and respectability than some persons may suppose, and it would be wel if editors themselves were to bear this in mind. The vocation which they have undertaken of c roniling and remarking on all that is going on around them, in a small community like this; of lecturing, as it were er cathedra, on all that interests or affects us in our political, social, literary, moral, and even religious relation; is one which demands, if not the exercise of the highest talent, at least the possession of an unblemished character, of honesty— [unclear].—moderation—- impartiality— judgment— good-feeling if no good taste—a Christian heart, if not a philospher's head. If in such a matter the public could chootheir own editor, would they not justly require something like these qualifications, and if so, what right has any man to offer himself in that capacity without the consciousness of possessing them, at least in some degree? It were to be wished that an offc.— [unclear] affecting the peace and welfare of a growing commu nity—could not be assumed by every person who c ud purchase types and hire compositors, but that something like a guarantee was required for the moral, if not mental competency of all who aspired to the performance of so solemn and responsible a work. W? should then be secure of having, for the conductors of our journals, individuals of whose power no good [unclear] need stard in awe; from whose page's decency noed not turn; nor religion or morality blush to be vindi-

cited by their pen. It will be seen from these observations that I think highly of the proper vocation of an editor; I do think highly, and regret that they should ever be committed to unworthy hands. I have, looked into the paper of which you, defendant, are the publisher and proprietor, and though it is the first number I have ever seen of it, I am sorry to perceive that the libel, for which you are now to receive judgment, is not the only portion of its columns which betokens, on the part of its editor, either utter misconception or utter disregard of what is due, both to himself and the public, in his editorial capacity. The libel which you hare been found guilty of publishing, is a very gross one; it imputes to the gentlemen attacked, the vilest motives in the most insulting language. It charges him with having gone on the bench, as a magistrate, from the " most despicable and dishonorable motives ;" not for the purpose of doing justice, but of " preventing justice being done," and that "out of vindictive motives" to the suitor. You will say that the libel is not of your composition, but your reporter's ; but you cannot say that it was inserted without your knowledge, for the contrary is manifest from your own note at the foot of the article. It is right, however, you should be told that you are bound to know what issues from a press of which you are the ostensible and responsible controller; and where others may suffer from the circulation of any slander or falsehood, it is an obligation of which you ought to feel the weight, no less in a moral than a legal print of view. In neglecting this you have been guilty, if not of actual malice, at least of that crassa negligentia, or gross disregard of your neighbours' interests, which the law holds equivalent to malice, and which, to the individual who suffers by it, is as disastrous as if it proceeded from the most malignant motives. I believe that a very profound writer upon this subject has not gone too far in saying, that " even same creditable editors, from their carelessness in regard to the articles with which their newspaper is filled, do harm in the world to an extent, in comparison with which robberies and treasons are as nothing." And sure I am that many a robbery, for which the culprits have stood at that bar, have caused far less sensation, and done far less injury to society and the parties robbed, than some of the paragraphs that occasionally emanate from our newspaper press. I have no desire, however, to visit upon you the errors or vices of the press in general, nor do I speak of those errors or vices as the sole characteristics of the colonial press, but simply as one very effectual means of weakening its.influence, diminishing its usefulness, disgusting its readers, and degrading its conductors. Still, the nature of the libel which you have been found guilty of publishing, is too serious, both as regards the language and the occasion on which it was used to be lightly passed over. The criminal who has stolen a few shillings in a fit of drunkenness, has been often sent to prison from this place, for six or twelve months, with very little sympathy from those who have stood around ; and yet in my mind, though the law may call the one a crime, and the other a misdemeanour, I regard such a theft as a far less serious offence, than that of "deliberately bearing false witness against one's neighbour." The punishment which in your case the law prescribes is, fine or imprisonment. The former I shall not inflict; for l am by no means certain that if I did, the penalty woull be paid by yourself; at all even's, I will not risk such a mockery and perversion of justice as would result from the infliction of a fine, from which undeserved sympathy, or party spirit might take upson itself to relieve you. I shall therefore direct you to be imprisoned, and although for a limited period, I trust it will operate as a lesson to yourself, and as a warning to all may he inclined to consider their pocket, only in danger from the per[unclear] or publication of calumnious attacks on the character of their neighbours.—The sentence of the Court is, that you be imprisoned in Her Majesty's . aol at Melbourne, tor the period of two calendar months.