The Press Monday, September 14, 1925. Crime and Publicity.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18486, 14 September 1925, Page 6

The Press Monday, September 14, 1925. Crime and Publicity.

The recurring discussioas on the power given to Magistrates in 1922 to prohibit the publication in the newspapers of the names of first offenders arc evidence of the unsatisfactory state of the law. The law is indeed bad, because it is based upon two unsound assumptions. The first of these is that it is not contrary to public policy to empower individuals to impose restrictions on the liberty of the Press. Apart from the fact that this power must be applied unequally and* arbitrarily, its exercise is an infraction of a principle for which the friends of justice and true freedom have had to fight for generations, and even for centuries. .A free Press is a nation's strongest shield against tyranny and misgovernment, and one must hesitate to admit even the most insignificantlooking curtailment of its liberty. Many judicious men will go so far as to say that the Press should be free from every kind of restriction, and made subject only to punishment for printing matter the substance of which is offensive to the laws erected in defence of public order and < propriety. The second unsound assumption in the existing law is that the newspapers can be regarded as a kind of supplementary organ of punishment and correction. This assumption is resented by all journalists who have thought much upon the function of the newspaper. The newspaper's function is to record events • and, if it pleases, to comment upon them, and not at all to perform any duty which our criminal law and our Courts are appointed to discharge. The publication of the name of an offender may perhaps act as a deterrent to other potential offenders, but that is an accident of its functions with which the newspaper has really nothiug to do. It is as. a chronicler of news, and not as an agent of the law, that the newspaper publishes its reports of the proceedings in th* Courts, The Courts, moreover, ought not as Courts to place any dependence upon the newspapers for any purpose whatever, and in the strictest view they go beyond their province when they allow the newspapers to enter their minds except as actual parties or witnesses coming before them. If the Courts cannot discharge their functions completely and effectively without private aid — and that is what the aid of the newspapers amounts to —their machinery onght to be amended. (We are not speaking of the law itself —which it> is the dnty of the newspaper, as of the citizen, to assist where assistance can be given—but of the Courts, which are supposed to require no assistance that the, law has not already provided.) The actual difficulty we are discussing could be remedied easily enough, to the advantage of the principles which suffer as the law now stands. If the power given to Magistrates in 1922 were - withdrawn,, Magistrates might be directed to express an opinion, which would not be a direction, upon the wisdom of printing the offender's name in any particular case. The newspapers would then exercise their own discretion, and we fhfnlr it may fairly be said that in general this discretion would be wisely exercised. This would place upon newspapers a responsibility they do not now bear, but this would rather help than hinder the progress of journalistic, efficiency.

The Demand (or Meat. Most of our readers will hope that it is true that the world is as short of, and as eager for, meat as the agent of the growers on the Australian Meat Council suggests in a cable message this morning. It must be remembered, • however, that his appeal is addressed to Australian prodxicers and not to our own, and that to the extent to which it is propaganda it j is to be read with reservations. On the other hand the representative of the Meat Council is not a politician. He can have.no interest, so far at least as Australian producers are concerned, but to tell them the truth, and since the estimate he asks them to accept is one "that, if it really is accepted, will affect their plans for years to come, he must recognise the danger of saying too much or too little. There is not much risk in accepting his statement that the world wants meat, and will go on wanting it. ' The millions who do not eat it are, religion apart, the millions who Cannot get it, and in spite of wars and waste they are a decreasing number. But to agree that the world wants meat is a very different thing from agreeing that it wants beef, and even Mr Cramsie does not say that it is beef especially for which the demand is rising. It is very doubtful whether there has ever been a world taste in meat that has not been three parts price to one part appetite. So far as New Zealand is concerned it has not for a long time been possible to give beef to the- Old World at*a price that would create a taste for it; though we are nearer to that possibility now than we have been for some years, and shall of course come nearer still if Mr Cramsie is right in saying that the demand for beef is increasing much more rapidly; than the supply. On our Commercial Page this morning we publish some live stock statistics from the June issue of the "Producer" which certainly support the conclusion that cattle have decreased in the two Americas, which it will be seen produce normally more than a third of the total cattle of the world. And so far as the United States is concerned, which Mr Cramsie thinks "will hove "all she can do soon to provide suffi"crienfc beef for her own people," there is confirmation of his view in a recent special article in the New York "Times." In Wyoming, Idaho, Arizona, and Texas, this article said, but most of all in New Mexico, conditions are .c|anging,so that

"large-scale cattle raising is doomed." As the United States ceases to be a pioneer country and the public lands arc broken up, the small herd of selected stock may still pay, but the huge herd is impossible. "It does "not pay you to own your land if "yon have ten thousand cows, and "each cow needs thirty acres, and "each acre costs you a dollar a year "instead of three cents." In the United Kingdom, also, on the other side of the Atlantic, the most striking feature of agriculture for two years—or perhaps we should say of the agricultural distress —has been the disappearance of the small-holder. Whether he has been beaten by the law, or by "gangs of middlemen," or by his own incompetence, his disappearance, according to the "New "Statesman," has cost Britain for cattle alone twenty-two million pounds since the end of 1923. The " New " Statesman" certainly regards the meat industry as "a mysterious " trade," and believes that if the mystery were cleared up a chief cause of dear meat would be found to be "Lord Vestey and/or the Big Five." It is, however, unusually well-informed, and its statements of fact support Mr Cramsie's estimate that the "present, " or even higher prices " for meat will continue for an indefinite time.

The War in Morocco. The return of Marshal Lyautey to Morocco, indicated a few days ago and now confirmed, does not mean that his visit to Paris had only a routine reason, or that he goes back to his former position and reputation. There can be no doubt that it was the intention to make him the scapegoat, and that if the Radicals have not had the satisfaction of restoring order on their own terms—" the presentation by " Herod-Painleve of the head of John " Lyautey to the delightful Salomc"Krim"—he has been temporarily at least shorn of much of his power. But it seems to be true also that the resistance to Krim has begun at last to be capably organised and effective, and it is quite likely that this was impossible while Lyautey remained as Resident-General. It is now admitted that more than one general of the first rank refused the command before General Naulin accepted it, .and that the reason was the ambiguity of the relations between Army Headquarters and the-Residency. It will be remembered by some readers that a first-class crisis developed at British Headquarters shortly after the retreat from Mons because Lord Kitchener went to Paris and assumed,/ or began to assume, military as well as political functions in his relations with Sir John French. The view taken by Sir John as Commander-in-Chief in the field was that if the Government was dissatisfied with him it should recall him, but that no one, not even Lord Kitchener himself, should assume military authority over him so long as he was left in charge of the Army. The position has been very much the same in Morocco. Until lately Marshal Lyantey's prestige was so great that a commander -could hardly exercise supreme authority while the ResidentGeneral remained in the country with undiminished powers; and that of course meant military confusion. We still do not know whether the military position is now as good for France as the cables suggest, or whether it is good at all; but it is safe to say that it will not remain good unless 'the Commander really commands. It ! may be assumed also that the appointment of Marshal Petain was demanded, not so ' much by the tactical or strategical difficulties, as by the position of Marshal Lyautey, who could neither be allowed to remain over the field commander nor be aske<i to make way for him if he a subordinate.