THE LAW OF LIBEL.
Wc republish from an exchange part of Lord Chief Justice Cockbum's summingup in the case of Spill v. Maule :- " Now, the presumption of law being in favor of the absence of malice in the defendant, and the only evidence of malice being his description of acts done by the plaintiff which were capable of a two-fold construction, the presumption of innocence which attaches to the writer must also, where his act is capable of a double aspect, still attend him. Starting with the presumption of innocence in his favor, we must assume that the defendant did entertain that view of the plaintiffs acts which induced him to believe, and honestly to believe, and say that the plaintiff's conduct was dishonest and disgraceful. We have not to deal with the question whether the plaint iff did or did not act dishonestly and disgracefully ; all wc have to examine is whether the defendant stated no more than what he believed, and what he might reasonably believe. If he stated no more than this he is not liable ; and unless proof to the contrary is produced, wc must take it that he did state no more.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OAM18770110.2.7
Bibliographic details
Oamaru Mail, Volume I, Issue 224, 10 January 1877, Page 2
Word Count
197THE LAW OF LIBEL. Oamaru Mail, Volume I, Issue 224, 10 January 1877, Page 2
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in