THE "LARNACH" LIBEL ACTION.

Press, Volume XLVI, Issue 7262, 23 January 1889, Page 5

THE "LARNACH" LIBEL ACTION.

VIEWS OF THE ATJCKLABD

PAPEB&

I B * TjaaoBASH.)

[took oca ooasMrosjj,^ AUCKLAND, January 20. Z r eaimi BercM ' herring to the libel action Larnach v Wilson and Hortoo, says:—

"We need hardly »!<** om that in the meagre and incomplete evidence adduced for the defence they have not the whole of the case relied on by the defendants, the ruling of the Court, which was, no doubt, strictly legal, shutting ou* all evidence available as to the batia of written and the Umafidet of the writers." The article points out that the defendants were not permitted to bring witnesses in waiting, including a Minister of th« Crown, leading Wellington iourualista and two officers of the Press Association', who were prepared to give evidence of theii belief that Mr Larnach had left the coiony. It concludes^."A Wellington jury has decided that w e did wrong, We bow to the voice of the law. We did whs* we did believing we were doing it for the publio good. It is an unpleasant thing,, of course, for a newspaper to be cast in damages, but the injury to the publio will be greater of such a verdict, as in many cases it may have the result of cowing honest journalism. The watchdogs of the public may be irksome sometimes, and sometimes idly bay at the moon, but as a rule he ia not a wise householder that kicks the watchdog for barking." The Star has a leader on the subject, couched in strong terms, and says:—" Our pettifogging politicians who protect their railway passes with so much vigUauca that their right to be carried free is tho only thing in connection with our railways over which the new Commissioners have no control, have left the Press so muzzled that even a fair report of the proceedings at a meeting of a public body is only published at the newspaper's peril. A journalist must carefully expurgate his reports, cut out anything that may possibly offend the sensibilities of any person whose conduct is called in question, and present to the public a hash which will effectually burk every attempt to expose abuses. That is the law as laid down by Mr Justice Richmond, who presided over both the latest cases in which journals nave been punished for publications which it is admitted were published in good faith and without malice, and for tho publio good, and which were not in the nature of personal scandal, but related to public men in a public capacity. Such a law is a disgrace to us as a community, and the Parliament of the colony Ought to be scarified by a united Press until the right of the public to receive faithful reports of all that transpires at meetings of public bodies is established by law, and there is absolute freedom in tho discussion of the acts of public men." The Star farther says: — "In the case brought against the Herald the Judge positively refused to admit evidence showing that the belief upon which the Heralds comments were based as to Mr Larnach's intended departure from the. Colony was one founded upon evidence which mighb reasonably have been accepted by tha writer as reliable. The judgment, in fact, amounted to this, no matter what a publio writer's convictions, nc matter how honestly and conscientiousli he may discharge lug duty, no matter what circumstances conspired to mislead him, nor what readiness ho may have dieplayed to frankly acknowledge his mistake and repair the injury done when he wss satisfied that he had fallen into error, the law is inexorable and can bo construed as bolstering up any suit which may be instituted i'rom feelings-of visdictiveness for the sake of public notoriety or a. desire for monetary gain. Happily juries are not always so easily -tai by judicial interpretations , of'w preposterous condition of the law. If.it were not for this there would be no safety or freedom in publio journalism, and the mouth of the Press would be effectively ranzekd. The Press, however, fills too important a sphere in our public life and instill Uons to carry on its functions under these precarious and barbaric conditions, and the people of New Zealand will b@ unworthy of tho liberty and name of Englishmen if they do not rise as one man and declare that this monstrous state of things shall be at once put an end to, and the right of free speech placed upon a sure and clearly denned footing by the statute law of the colony.