THE SYDNEY BULLETIN.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2810, 27 March 1882, Page 2

THE SYDNEY BULLETIN.

? This ably conducted journal, it will be remembered, .fell 'foul of the law some months ago in this wise:—Cion* tarf, a suburb of .Sydney,, the “Bulletin pbinted out, was” a rfesor’t sorts of. disreputable characters." 'Dancing and : ,slrong r drinl£ ihdulged in' without ’supervision or restraint, and thV most revolting scenes took -place. In the deliberately, expressed, ,pf the “ Pulletlni 1 ’ tile ‘ of such a nuisance was utterly subversivejof morality and 'a loathsome disgrace td civilization. We h&ve repeatedly heard •descriptions of .it from other sources,-whioh-fully bearout'the'remarks of the “Bulletin.” The proprietor of the gar ddns brought an action against the “ Bulletin,” and; the case : was ; tried before Judge Windeyer and a jury of fohr, and the result was ia verdict for plaintiffs for ope.farthing damages. . It wis necessary for the judge to certify foif costs;' which he did to the cheerful 'tune of £ISOO. So, strong, was the best of public i feeling, on the ■ .subject; however,’ that a subscription was started, resulting in the raising Of ;£BOO to assist Messrs Haynes and Archibald (the pro:, prietor.s of the “ Bulletin.”) As these : gbntlemeu. were unable to raise the' remainang £7OO they were consigned, to gadr for.a.periodof twelve, months,' It : is usually desiredthat' the' Press' should, be a guardian 'bf i public l mOiffility’' 1 but' ’this sort of treatment is not encouraging. . In conclusion 'we give the ; w Bulletin’s ” own strong . but, well-warranted comments on the .IssUe.of the ''trial:—“ At this point ! thd‘dignified Judge chipped in. ’. It fell to him to put his. hand .upon, the balanced ’ To J him ah appreciative couptry had intrusted its highest interests. The scales of Justice poised. ' They trembled between a great example .and a great infamy. The Administrator of Justice paused, deliberated. Precedent, law, custom, revolved , - in tangled complication before his trained and cultivated mind. Apart and above ' them, stood the divine figure of that Justice which it was his splendid privilege to serve. He made his choice. The farthing, which seemed, to the expublioan;;tho publican, the groc'er, and the nightman, adequate fine for the crime of warning the public, he augmented, practically; 'by some £1,500, and,'by his judgment, further decided that the interests of justice and of the public weal .required that ; those who haiji interfered with the holiday business should bo handed over to the tender mercies of the injured caterers for public enjoyments. The latter were empowered to claim from their. censors compensation for tho expense to which they had been put. They could sell the Court of How South Wales. How tho public regard this species of the article they . already shown by actions—wo do r not' mean -libel-actions. The protestations of the public have' taken a substantial form, and there is no doubt that if goodwillcould have freed Messrs Haynes and Archibald from the consequences of a disgraceful maladministration of law, they would not .now be in Darlinghurst. But the penalty upon them 1 appears too considerable- oven for the spontaneous generosity of a grateful public to remove. ; Wo do hot remember

an instance in which, among so small a population, so large a sum has ever before been contributed towards a newspaper proprietary’s expenses, incurred in doing good service to the public. £BOO is a very great deal of money. But Injustice has outbidden Sympathy by £7OO, and nothing now appears possible save that Messrs Jlaynosxund - Archibald shall serve out their term of punishment, to the everlasting disgrace of our laws; and of those who pretend to administer justice.”