STRINGER v. NORTON.
The Christchurch News commenting on the case, says: The verdict of the jury in, the case of Stringer v. Norton may be interpreted as expressing what the public thinks of the particular kind of garbagetiu journalism the defendant has endeavoured to establish in New Zealand- Under the pretext that its function is to expose wrongdoing, it is merely a purveyor of literary sewage gathered from the police court and the slums, and varied occasionally by slanderous attacks on persons whose position makes them a target tor caulmuy. The circulation of this demoralising stuff throughout the country cannot be anything but highly prejudicial to the cause of public morality, and it is, a very .healthy sign to find that an ordinary jury drawn from men in all walks of life, has no sympathy whatever with the methods of the defendant, and is prepared to vindicate handsomely the victims of his slanderous attacks.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH19090601.2.7
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 460, 1 June 1909, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
154STRINGER v. NORTON. Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 460, 1 June 1909, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Manawatu Herald. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in