South Canterbury Times. FRIDAY, MARCH 19, 1880.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2185, 19 March 1880, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. FRIDAY, MARCH 19, 1880.

A telegram from Melbourne informs us that the proprietor of the “ Age ” has commenced proceedings against" Punch” for libel. The fact that one journalist should condescend to proceed against another in this way shows that libel suits arc becoming increasingly popular. The proprietors of journals in the colonies have generally been made so unpleasantly acquainted with libel actions that they will withstand a very large amount of public ridicule and abuse before pitching the Golden Rule aside. It is quite possible that in the ease of the proprietor of the “ Age ’* the grievance is a most substantial one, but, in the interests

of -the Colonial Press it is deeply to he, regretted that an experienced journalist like Mr Syme should deem such proceedings expedient or necessary. Journalists as a rule regard with a feeling of pity and contempt the mean, thin-skinned, or avaricious creatures that indulge in actions of libel. The class of litigants who are usually to be found prosecuting publishers are either persons with characters so utterly threadbare as to render defamation an impossibility,or unprincipled individuals, whose object is simply to extort money. The man who attains a position of eminence in any profession —the tradesman or merchant, whose reputation is established before his fellowmen—invariably laughsat calumny and thecaluminator is silenced and ashamed. But these men seldom or never indulge in actions of libel. It is only from the worthless that the Press, as a rule, has anything to fear. At the last sitting of the Supreme Court in Timaru an example—and a most glaring one — of the trumpery charges that are magnified into criminal libels was brought under the notice of his Honor Judge Johnstone, who, to his credit, denounced the prosecution as uncalled-for and almost reprehensible. Mr Soames, solicitor of the London “ Times,” stated some months ago, before a Select Committee on the Law of Libel, that out of every ton actions against newspapers at least eight are of a purely speculative character brought by persons “ who have no real grievance, and who have no means of paying costs if they Jose, simply in the hope of extorting a compromise ” If this is the case as regards the English Press, it applies still more forcibly to the Colonial press. There is a class of men in the Colonies who simply prey upon journalism, and it is to be deplored that the law of libel—which is really a libel on the law —is such as to enable them frequently to succeed. The press, however fearless and outspoken, has nothing to fear, so long as it discharges its duty honestly, from jersons of reputation and good standing. It is those who have neither money nor reputation to lose that are invariably susceptible to damage, and of whom the press has to be excessively careful. If the liberty of the press is to be preserved, some significant alteration in the law of libel will have to be effected.