The Dominion. THURSDAY, JANUARY 26, 1911. POLITICAL LIBELS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1035, 26 January 1911, Page 4

The Dominion. THURSDAY, JANUARY 26, 1911. POLITICAL LIBELS.

We had something to say yesterday upon a question arising out of the .increasing .heat and violence with :whioh political controversies in Great Britain—and, indeed, in most countries—aro nowadays conducted. The question was whether politicianSj, when discussing their opponents from the platform, should not limit themselves to the language they might use in private discussion. That is an aspect of political controvarsy which it may be profitable to discuss, but which there is no machinery to bring to a solution. Ihcrc is another phase of the mattor, however, which is even more important, and that is the length to which a-._ political controversialist 'may go without incurring the penaltics provided by law for libellers. Such a multitude of sins are covered by-politics that to lay down anything like hard and fast rules, that anybody can apply with confidence, is- impossible; but the increasing intensity of British politics is gradually enabling the British Courts, by ■ furnishing them with cases,.to draw tho rough boundaries between legitimate and illegitimate political criticism. A particularly interesting case, which we briefly noted when the verdict was cabled to.us, was decided in London last month by Me. Justice Geantham. Mr. P. C. Simmons was a candidate for Parliament in the Unionist interest at the elections of January, 1909; and a few days before the poll the Daily Chraniclt} printed and circulated a special edition containing certain statements about Mr. .Simmons of a very injurious character. One of those was to the effect that Mr. Simmons had helped to throw 3000' men out of work, and another that he had on, three separate occasions voted agaia'st the feeding of poor children. '. • ..

This was tho Radical' paper's way of misrepresenting, with tho object of making' Mii. Simmons hateful in tho eyes of the voters, certain incidents in London County Council politics. -The fqofc was that Mr. Simmons was ono of some 70 members of the Council who, as the result of an mvestigation by a sub-committee, supported tho ending of tho very wasteful Works Department. As to the second libel, it;was shown that tlio Education Committee of the Council had reported that as public funds in the shane of voluntary contributions were " sufficient for tho of providing free meals for noor children, it was unnecessary to levy a rato for this purpose. Mr. Simmons, and others, voted against a proposed amendment that a rate should be struck. It was shown that the bald and dishonest statements in the Chronicle had aroused strong feeling against Mr. Simmons. Children- threw mud and dirt at him, and called him "kid starver"; women spat.inhisface; the men called out as he .passed, "How many more men arc you going to turn out of their jobs!" The defence, so far as it was not an attemnt to prejudice Mn. Simmons.by assertions that he had just as strongly attacked tho Radical party, seems to have been a plea- that "it must have been plain and known to everyone that what was meant by the words was, not that Mr. Simmons had wished .to starve tho children, but* that; .he had merely voted against their baing fed out of rates." ' This sadly disingenuous plea had upon the judge or jury; who did not require to be told that the Daily Chronicle would havo been; greatly disappointed if the mass of ignorant voters had not been led to believe the worst of Mr. SisiMONS. The verdict was given for' the plaintiff, damages being fixed at £5000.

Tho judge's summing up" was unusually interesting, and a perusal of. it will probably be serviceable to those Radical newspapers and politicians in v this country who have of late showii a disposition to use the truth very economically. Tho case, said his.Honour, was a.most important one] because false statements between political opponents had largely increased since thbVfranchiso had been extended and carried more weight amongst the illiterate electors. It was plain, he added, that Mr. Simmons did not in fact turn men out of work, and was, as ho thought, working in the best interests of the public. "The statement that the plaintiff had voted three times against tho feeding of poor children was also a statement of fact [and not comment], and if there was one kind of statement likely to arouse bitter Reeling more than another, this one that a man had refused children food would do it. It might havo been comment if' the paper had stated that the plaintiff, had refused to feed the children out of the rates, and had stated tho circumstances; but it is plainly the duty of tho County Council to keep things off the rates as long as possible." The Radical press rallied to the support of the Daily Chronicle by complaining that such an action and such a verdict ought to be made impossible. This was natural enpush, since, as Radicalism's strongest clientele everywhere is the ignorant multitude, Radicalism stands to

lose heavily by any prohibition upon tho publication of half-truths calculated to inflame the thoughtless and uninstructed. While the public interest requires that, the press shall have full liberty to criticise public men with the. utmost severity when necessary, tho public interest and the usefulness of the press require just as much the existence of an antiseptic in tho shape' of a strong law against the dissemination of malicious untruths or half-truths.