The Evening Post. TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 1871.

It would be a work of supererogation to attempt proving to any community of Englishmen, either at home or abroad, that one of the strongest bulwarks of that liberty which they value so highly, and vaunt so loudly, is freedom of speech, as represented by the Press. In our mother country the Press, which a century ago was a feeble institution, struggled through a long courso of evil and corrupt years, assorting and upholding the rights of oppressed nationalities, sections of society and individuals, and defying every effort made by tyranny to crush it, and has now become a mighty power, wielding sway over a wider empire than was ever ruled by the Cresars — the hearts and minds of men. It can throw its shield over the humblest citizen menaced by injustice or tyianny, and can force the most highlyplaced invader of the rights of society to come down from his vantage ground and answer for his deeds. It would bo needless to recount its triumphs — their name is legion — and they are imperishably recorded in the history of civilisation and progress. No surer indication can be given of the place which a nation holds among its neighbors than the degree of freedom possessed by its Press — the more complete that freedom, the higher that position in relative the scale. And well do our countrymen at home appreciate the benefits of liberty of speech, and free expression of opinion — every encroachment on this sacred privilege is guarded against with the utmost jealousy, and a determination evinced on all occasions to uphold the Magna Charta of their liberties. We, who from the teeming hive of nations, have come out to these distant countries to find a larger sphere for our exertions, and to found new States which in

yoai'.s to come may rival those of \\v> old world, li.ive unauiinoush .i^r- ¦<! that we can find no better model Ih.uj the glorious iJ island of the .-;;i<^e and free," and have endeavoured to adopt her institutions with as slight modifications as possible, and amongs', those the freedom of the J J ress. It is manifestly impossible that in the short time which has elapsed since the work of colonization commenced in Australasia, or for many years to come, the Press of these Colonies can acquire either the influence or the higli character of that of England ; but such {is the Colonial ' Press is, we have every reason to be proud of it, and have quite as strong an interest in preserving its freedom and purity as our countrymen at home can have in cherishing theirs. Here, as there, it is ilia true safeguard of the liberties of the people, and the people have the clearest possible interest in affording it support so long as it continues to merit it. The Press and the people have a mutual interest, and in no country or no Colony can real freedom or real j>msperity exist where the Press is gagged. There are very few in New Zealand who are not now more or less acquainted with, the remarkable case which has been occupying the attention of one of the law Courts in Otago — Keginti v. Barton. This case is yet nub jv dire, and therefore, for obvious reasons, we shall refrain from commenting on its merits, more especially as we have already published copious reports of the proceedings at lhmedin, and the masterly speech of the counsel for the defence, which gave a succint and able summary of the matter so far as it has yet gone. We will not express an [ opinion as to whether Mr. Barton was justified in using the language which he did, or whether the Government was called upon to expend public money in prosecuting him •. upon these ]3oints the public Avill be able to form their own judgment from the reports of the trial ; but we do say that Mr. Barton personally is not the real de- ! fendant in the action — 'that position is occupied by the whole Press and people of New Zealand, and Mr. Barton should not Toe left alone to bear the brunt of it. Grant for the sake of argument that he was wrong — that he was not justified, in bringing against the Government the charges which he did, and that the Government we justified in vindicating themselves by prosecuting him — still he acted for the public interest, and in discharge of what he conceived to be a sacred duty, and he has a right to ask those whose "battle he was fighting to come to his assistance. Whatever may be the motives which have actuated the Government in undertaking this prosecution, and whatever may be its result, it will, except the public step in to the rescue, have the effect of virtually gagging the Press. No Editor of a public journal will in future dare to expose abuses, however glaring, censure the proceedings of a corrupt Government, or stand up for the rights of the people if he knows that he is liable to be criminally prosecuted at the will of the Government, and, whether acquitted or not, put to a ruinous expense, while his opjoonents have the public purse to draAV upon at discretion. Such a precedent as this Avould be fatal alike to the liberty of the Press and the Colony. No longer exposed to censorship, the Government would be without check ; and who shall say what they might not then attempt 1 Mr. Barton has already been subjected to very heavy expenses, and must itfeur others still greater before his case is concluded ; even his acquittal would not free him from them, and in our opinion he has a strong claim upon the Press and the public of the Colony, to whose cause he is a martyr, for assistance. A public subscription to defray the costs of the defence appears to us the only method by which tlie untoward consequences of the trial which we have pointed out above, can be averted. The man who wilfully uses the columns of a newspaper as a medium for disseminating slander, or injuring the character of individuals, deserves no sympathy if punishment overtakes him ; but he who falls into trouble while advocating public rights or interests, appeals to every generous feeling for support. Instances are not wanting in Australia of newspaper editors and proprietors, who have suffered through exposing grave abuses, receiving the liberal support of- the public, and we trust the people of New Zealand will not display any inferiority in this respect. The Press especially ought to be prominent by its liberality — the question being one affecting its vital interests, its character, and its future usefulness ; and we hope that our independent contemporaries throughout the Colony will take the matter up warmly. We are sorry to admit, however, that there is a section of the Press of New Zealand from, which no such manly conduct can be expected — who trim their sails to catch the breeze of Ministerial favor, and unblushingly speak as they are told, in consideration of their hire. These are more likely to hunt one of their own order to death, to please their patrons, than to say a word on his behalf. Still, we are happy to know that both they and those who trust in them are few in number, and we believe that the large majority of New Zealand colonists "who have not , bowed the knee to Baal " will evince

tlifii- Bi-itish low of fa- r }>lnv nn<l jiativf! of oj)jjrr-s.-,ioii. and tlx'ir desire to ui-'iu'jiiti iii\io!;'t<* tin* s;ifV-</rmrd of tli- i • liberties, by in^ their \vi]liii£u<*^ to com*"* to tli'- u^istanee of om: who has b"f-n ovc-rpowf-rfd while fighting for" thr-m.