Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. GISBORNE: TUESDAY, APRIL 3, 1883.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1304, 3 April 1883, Page 2

Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. GISBORNE: TUESDAY, APRIL 3, 1883.

Much attention has lately been drawn to the Imperial Acts affecting libel, the more especially in cases where newspapers, by adverse or sharp criticism, have brought down upon themselves the ire of persons upon whom the lash of satire or argument may have fallen. There seems to be a prevailing impression among the many who are either wilfully or otherwise ignorant of the real duties and obligations devolving upon a journalist, that the zenith of his pleasure is necessarily attained by cavilling at and attaching false interpretations to the actions or words of fellow creatures in the very many kaleidoscopic views which are presented to him of them in his professional capacity. That these impressions, false though they be, arc exaggerated and fnstprpil bv those w’nnsc interests and venal

cupidity render it necessary that criticism, hoarile to impure and indecent usages, should be suppressed, and, if possible, annihilated, is a fact that is patent to all thinking minds, and it is also a matter of undeniable and sorrowful fact that powerful combinations are frequently entered into for the express purpose of suppressing any journalistic criticism which might tend towards eo desirable an end ; and to aid the schemers in such suppression, the law of libel has frequently, but fortunately with unfrequent success, been brought to boar upon journalists whose writings have been inspired, simply and solely with a view to good ends in the interests of the public. If a plausible rogue thrives in our midst, it is the duty of the journalist to unmask him. If a criminal is escaping from justice, it is the duty of journalist to aid to the utmost of his ability in frustrating such escape. If an injustice is being perpetrated, be the victim high or low, rich or poor, and the act of injustice great or email, the journalist in the hard matter of fact execution of his inevitable and unpleasant duty is morally bound by his criticism, and the general tone of his writing, to endeavor his utmost to frustrate any unjust or wrong action and compel right to be done, utterly irrespective of persons, and utterly regardless of any consequences to himself in any action for libel which may arise out of the matter. Truthful in his statements, logical in his deductions, and just although caustic in his criticism, although he be, the journalist is sure to meet with adverse action in those whose deeds cannot bear the powerful light he throws upon them. Of late the more enlightened oi the nations of the world have been daily recognising the liberty of the Tress, and in the Colonies, the law of libel has become a matter of deep anxiety, more especially in New Zealand, where the vital importance to Colonists of an early alteration in the law of libel was amply set forth by Mr Tolk the member for Mount Eden, and other members of the House of Representatives during the recent session of Parliament ; the Resident Magistrates’ Court having no jurisdiction in cases effecting defamatory libel except when the peace of the subject is thereby threatened or endangered, in which case sureties may he called for in the acknowledgment by any person of a recognizance or bond to the .Sovereign, taken by any competent Judge of Record for the keeping of the peace by any such offender towards all Her Majesty’s subjects, or towards some particular named person, or towards both. A justice of the peace being in such esses, by virtue of the powers conferred upon him, enabled to call upon offenders to enter into recognizances as referred to when commanded to do so by the Supreme Court, or requested to do so by any person who shall satisfy the Justice, upon oath, that the person from whom surety is sought, has used provoking or insulting language, or has exhibited any offensive writing or object, or done any offensive act to or in the presence of the party complaining, for the purpose of annoyar.ee and provocation, or publicly and to the common annoyance of Her Majesty’s subjects; and being of opinion that such conduct is likely to be repeated, and may tend to provoke a breach of the peace. But even here there are exceptions of the common law to the general rules of this subject which preclude the Justices from making persons complained of find sureties, as for instance, where the application is only made for vexation ana annoyance, or if the only cause be that the applicant is at variance 01 tjuit with his neighbour, or where the threat relied upon is merely contingent upon the applicant aoing something which he has no right to do ; any of which causes being satisfactorily established to the mind of the Magistrate or Justice of the Peace, he shall refuse to call upon the persons complained of to find sureties and shall leave the complainant to seek his remedy by action at law. Mr Tole’s Bill meets many shortcomings in the law, and although shelved until the coming Session of 1883, will, doubtless, eventually become law, although perhaps in a slightly altered form. Mr Tole’s Act confers powers of jurisdiction on Courts of Resident Magistrates or two or more Justices of the Peace, acting under “The Justices of the Peace Act, 1866,” or any similar Court lawfully constituted, and provides that protection shall be given to newspapers where the subject matter complained of r-hall be fairly and accurately set forth and for the public benefit. No criminal prosecution is to be commenced against any proprietor, publisher, or editor, of any person responsible for the publication of a newspaper for any libe]

therein contained without the written fiat of tho AtterneyjGenoral for the time being of the Colony, being first hr.d and obtained. Other provisions of Mr Tole’s Act are equally liberal and to our mind tend greatly to preserve the equilibrium between parties aggrieved by the libe’lous matter and the aggressors. If a newspaper is properly conducted it will not shirk its duty or be deterred from seeking to expose fraud or chicanery by reason of threats of actions for libel, and yet in the honest performance of such duties it has to incur serious risk of annoyance at the hands of those with whom it has come in hostile contact. Still libel or no libel, action or no action, the well-conducted journal must preserve the even tenor of its way, trusting to knowledge and discretion to steer it clear of ulterior results having their origin in the intimate dislike of the evil doer to the exposure of his evil deeds. Were the Press of the Colony to cease to exercise that vigilance which, as the watchdogs of the people and the conservators of public interests, is so universally demanded at its hands there would he a aad farewell to nil

hope of justice generally an<l the righting of possible wrong. Lawlessness and effrontery would run riot, the imposter go unmarked, and the criminal revel in tho prospect so afforded him of unexposed evil doing. For our own part, we say unhcsitatingly that we recognize our duty in such instances as being unavoidable, and we shall endeavor to perform it without flinching, be the consequences what they may, and we sincerely hope in the interests of the public that during the ensuing Session of Parliament, as in the past, the law of libel will meet with much serious attention from members generally, and from legal members especially, and that Mr Tole’s “ Act to amend the*Law of Libel ” will in an enlarged and improved form become law.