LAW OF LIBEL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVIII, Issue 6003, 12 February 1881, Page 7

LAW OF LIBEL.

On the IStli June List a select committee ol the House of Commons was reappointed to inquire into the law,of libel. The committee consisted of the Attonrey-Gener.il (Sir Henry James, Q.C.), Sir John Holker, Mr. Courtney, Mr. Stavely Hill, Mr. Alexander Sullivan, Baron Henry de Worms, Mr. EdwardLeatham, Mr. Gregory, Mr. Blennerliassett, Mr. Floyer, Dr. Cameron, Mr. Kiehard Paget, Mr. Errington, Mr. Master, Sir. Hutchinson. The committee met five times, and 011 the 14th July agreed to the following report:—The select committee reappointed to inquire into the law of newspaper libel have a.reed to the following report:—Your committee have not thought it neccessary to call witnesses upon the , matters referred to them. They have had the advantage of the evidence taken by the ] Select Committee of 1579, who, owing to the short time at their disposal, were unable to report, and your committee are of opinion that through the labours of the former committee suificient information has been accumulated for the purposes of their inquiry. Your committee have confined themselve • to an examination of the state of the law affecting civil actions and criminal prosecutions for newspaper libel, and to the changes which, in their judgment, sliould be made therein. It appears to your committee that one of the most important points of the subject referred to them is the question of extension of privilege to newspaper reports of the proceedings of public meetings. Your committee, after careful consideration, have come to the conclusion that the balance of convenience requires that further protection sliould be given to such reports. Your committee accrodingly recommend that any repovt published in any newspaper of the proceedings of a pubic meeting should be privileged, if such meeting was lawfully convened for a lawful purpose, and was opened to the pnblic ; and if such report was fair and accurate, and published without malice, and if the publication of the matter complained of was for the public benefit. But your committee are of opinion that such protection should not be available as a defence in any proceeding if the plantid or prosecutor can show that the defendant has refused to insert a reasonable letter, or statement of explanation or contradiction by or on behalf of such plaintiff or prosecutor. Your committee recommend that no criminal prosecution shall be commenced against the proprietor, publisher, editor, or anyone responsible for the publication of a newspaper, for any libel published therein, without the fiat of the Attorney-General being first obtained. Your committee are also of opinion that the name of every proprietor of a newspaper, or. in the case of several persons engaged as partners in such proprietorship, the names of all such persons, should be registered at the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, with full particulars of the addresses and occupations of all such persons, or of any change therein."