South Canterbury Times. THURSDAY, MAY 11, 1882.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2848, 11 May 1882, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. THURSDAY, MAY 11, 1882.

Public attention in Australia •; has been directed of late to the law of libel, under which, as it at present exists, very considerable suffering has been inflicted on individuals—unjustly in many cases, as it is now generally admitted. The most recent,,case is' that of the proprietors of the Sydney “Bulletin-’’ who, as is well, known, have suffered a term of imprisonment in satisfaction of a heavy bill of costs. It was in connection with an , action for libel entered against the firm by the proprietors of a certain place of public resort injthe suburbs of Sydney, which the “ Bulletin ” had denounced as a resort of bad characters and a haunt of vice. The verdict was for the plaintiffs, one farthing damages, and, it became necessary for the Judge to certify for costs, which he did to the tune of fifteen hundred pounds. Not being prepared to pay the amount, the journalists had to go to gaol. The public, headed by the most influential men in Sydney, raised some eight hundred pounds before the writers went to Darlingburst, but the remaining seven hundred remained unpaid till lately. The amount has now been fully made up and the leaders of the subscription movement had the satisfaction of driving to Darlingburst a few days ago, hearing the order for the release of Messrs Haynes and Archibald, and driving them back to freedom and triumph. Such is the latest episode in connection with the law of libel; and it brought the subject so prominently forward as to ensure its being well ventilated. Everybody has long felt that the law of libel was in a very unsatisfactory state, and that very vexatious prosecutions might easily take place under it. We may describe libel, briefly, as a published writing calculated to injure a person in his business, or bring him into contempt. But it is always to be understood that such business is one within the pale of morality. If a person pursues a calling, or is guilty of conduct, which, by common consent of

respectable members of tbc community is : reprehensible, no published writing can affect his position. In the case we have referred to it was patent to everybody that the existence of the Clontarf Gardens, under the existing management, was prejudicial to the public morality, and called for censure iu the interests of public morality. This castigation the “ Bulletin” ventured to administer ; and, for so doing, it was mulcted in damages (no matter how nominal) and very heavy costs. It seems hard to conceive a jury finding for the plaintiffs in such a case as this, and harder still to conceive a judge certifying, to costs. It was obvious from the tone of the “ Bulletin’s” remarks that they were made iu a public spirit; and the agreement between the facts within everybody’s knowledge, and the record of them made by the offending journal was sufficiently conclusive evidence that the strictures were warranted. It would be hard indeed if. the Press were so gagged as to be unable to attack glaring abuses ; and if the loss, suffering .or inconvenience of the authors of the abuses were to furnish grounds for action against a journal which, in pursuance of its intention to protect the . public morals, dared -to speak plainly and call a nuisance or an abuse by its proper name. If such were the case, what hope would there be of purifying the stage, for example ? Any performance, involving immorality of the grossest description or the most absurd rubbish, w;puld be put forward with impunity, whereas, given a free Press, purity of the stage will speedily follow. It is within the knowledge of ourselves and our readers that the independent criticism of the Press actually has been the means of elevating the, stage. In dealing with private individuals and their actions, the greatest caution ; and forbearance are necessary. The censure of the 'Press in such a case is, not generally :needed, for the individual is always [subject to the censure of those among •whom he moves, whereas public 'amusements possess a certain powerful and widespread influence conceded .to them by universal consent, under cover of which they may easily introduce moral corruption among the people. It is to be hoped we shall hear of some amendment in this 'matter ; or, if not, public feeling will soon manifest itself in the direction of a radical change in the administration of the laws. Law is to be a protector not a persecutor.

It is reported that the Nihilists are endeavoring to obtain the co-operation of the persecuted Jews in Russia, against the Government. We shall await, with some curiosity, further particulars of this proposed coalition. If we ventured to speculate ‘ we should "be inclined to think it highly improbable that it would ever come off. The Nihilists have a certain love of their country ; they proposed to elevate and purify her, after their own fashion ; there is a certain basis of patriotism as well as love of liberty in them, wild as are the excesses to which undisciplined zeal conducts them. But the Jews, especially those in Europe, regard themselves as “ strangers and pilgrims ” in Gentile lands, and patiently await the day of restoration to.their ancient home, and more than their former glory. It is as they believe part of the heavy punishment of Israel that they should endure , all sorts of ignominy and persecution in other lands,. £ ,

“ For where our fathers’ ashes be Our own may never lie.” They then will not be likely to regard themselves as having any part or'lot with other nations among whom chatice may have cast their lot, and are very unlikely to take any active part in the systems of rebellion, or to be agitated by any such, passion for destruction and reconstruction as inspires the Nihilists. Their efforts will be directed towards quitting a land which refuses them shelter and protection.