The Sala Libel Case.

Cromwell Argus, Volume 2, Issue 81, 30 May 1871, Page 7

The Sala Libel Case.

The action for libel brought by Mr Geo. Augustus Sil.i against Messrs llodderand S'onghtou, the publishers of Air Haiu Frwwell's "Modern Men of Letters" re commends itself (says tke Afgusi) to tile consideration of journalists in the colonies. The frequent reader of the Australian daily and Weekly press cannot fail to have observed that in the " smart writing" af ifected by many contributors' to the amuseiii'lfeov instruction of the public, there is occasionally seen to crop out a marked vein of that bitter and reckless personality which is the shame of American journalism. The libel dh the well-known special correspondent of the Daily Telegraph consisted in the substitution of an attack upon supposed personal failings for critical comment upon literary pretensions. Instead of saying that Mr Sala was often turgid and Obscure, often slipshod in his English and obtrusive of his knowledge of foreign tongues, that he wrote in haste that which ho repented at leisure, that he was sometimes untrustworthy as to his facts and often began well where he ended badly, the critic accuses him of " being in the [ hands of the Jews, often drunken, always in debt, sometimes in prison, and totally disreputable." For the publication of these statements about liis poverty and weakness, Mr Sala brings an action for damages, and the jury, considering such " honest ijt'iticisrn" beneath the dignity of " honest abuse," award him £SOO. But Mr Friswell's mud lias probably stuck, and hundreds of persons who only know the alt lior of "A Journey due North," as a cLver, wayward, and brilliant man of lettei-3 are made aware that he owns a private life which gentlemen of the Friswell stamp consider " totally disreputable." Looking at this libel and its consequences, we cannot fail to see where Mr Fristtoll has overstepped the bounds of literary modesty. U pjn the strength of h-s very meagre claims to He thought a compei tent critic of his contemporaries*, he has seized upon that public life of letters by which alone Mr Sala should be publicly judged, and held it a3 a candle to that private life of eating, drinking, and making money, which Mr Sala's personal acquaintance have alone a right to criticise. Instead of finding fault with Mr S.da's pn .lis!i»d writing, by the excellence of which Mr Sda has earned sumVient reputation to make the writing of his biography pecuniarily advantageous to Mr Friswell, Mr Friswoll accuses his enemy of committing all sorts of social laches, the which if he had committed them all a thousand times over, would not render his marvellous power of description one whit less photographic, or his wonderful tours de force of narration one whit les3 fascinating arid unsatisfactory. The inability to dis tinguish the difference between the author as an author, and the author as & private individual, has led Mr Friswell into this error, and it is precisely this inability wnich wo fear may soon rudely show itself in our Australian hebdomadal litrature. Possibly Mr Friswell had no thought that his speech would have been strained to grosser issues, lie may have intended to be only playful. Personality, however, is not wit, nor can the will to injure give always the power to strike, non ciiivis cmti'jit, i&c, and there .are happily but few ill-natured persons who possess that sleekness of fur and keenness of claw which is the privilege alike of the eat and the. satirist. Wrathful Mr Friswell may have ' thought himself pious when ho was only bi'lious.' In any however, the fate which has overtaken Mr Sala's dofamer is well deserved, and wd trust that the salutary example made of him may deter from a plunge into the ancient Fleet ditch of scurrilous personality, any gentleman who eager to emulate the Bardolphian pleasantry of certain American newspapers, may quit criticism of literary ability for unwarranted comment upon private character.