Untitled

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1158, 20 June 1911, Page 4

There have been an extraordinary number of libel actions decided in British Courts during the past year, and hardly a week passes without bringing us some statement by a British Judge upon some of the most important aspects of this phenomenon. We are strongly of opinion that unduly to relax the libel law will destroy a valuable antiseptic, but in some cases British juries have given heavy damages against newspapers and persons who have mis-stated no _ facts and have not gone beyond fair comment. We noted a few days ago an excellent judgment affirming in a signal manner the importance of protecting fair and honest comment, and yesterday's mail brings us a notable speech by Mr. Justice Scrutton at the annual dinner of the Newspaper Society on May 10: When the law of fair comment was thoroughly established (he said) lie thought that newspapers would occupy a better position than the.v did now. He always told juries, and he was happy to say they generally acted on what hi told them, that an honest expression of opinion, although the jury disagreed with it, was fair comment which should bo allowed, even though derogatory and disparaging to tho person about whom it was made. The same liberal doctrine that justifies fair comment requires unflinching severity in punishing deliberate and damaging misstatements of fact, whether made directly or indirectly. A great number of the libel actions in Britain during the past year have arisen out of politics, and in that region it is specially necessary that sound principles should rule. The stoutest defender of fair commcnt will probably be the sharpest .censor of falsity in suggestions or statements of fact, and we are very sure that Mn. Justice Scrutton would make short work of the theory, not unknown in New Zealand record-, that a venomous and damaging plain lie is privileged if it is only vtcd in political warfare.