CHAPTER XLVII.

Otago Witness, Issue 1865, 19 August 1887, Page 9

CHAPTER XLVII.

' THE TIMES ' BOYCOTTS MRS LANGWOBTHY.

"Mr Chamberlain," said one •of his greatest friends, " has one great fault : he never forgives." In this Mr Chamberlain resembles ' The Times.' Mrs Langworthy, it might have been thought, was too small a victim for the Thunderer of- Printing-house Square to remember for punishment. It may be so. It may be that the- real reason why they refused to report the case was not resentment, but Bircham. Whatever may have been the origin of the decree, the fact remains that, as our correspondent "L.E.X." remarks, the columns of • The Times ' may be searched in vain for any record of the actions by which Mrs Langworthy vindicated her character, even though she lost her suit.

This was mean. Mrs Langworthy's case, as this story proves, is full of elements of intense interest. It abounds in legal points of great importance. As mere " copy "it is better matter than the report of almost any cases heard in Court. But 'The Times' refused to report it. In the law notices of Saturday, June 20, the case of Langworthy v. Langworthy appears at the head of the list as published in ' The Times.' But in Monday's ' Times ' there is no report of the case — no hint that the marriage had been admitted and the fraud confessed. Not a word.

In like manner the entry appears again in ' The Times's ' law notices June 22 and July 7, but no report— not even a cursory mention of the proceedings. Surely this is not exactly the kind of treatment which might be expected from the leading English journal, even when the injured lady does happen to be Irish. But it may be suggested that the press of matter or the pressure of great issues may have caused the editor of • The Times ' to overlook the case. But Mrs Langworthy took the most effective means to draw attention to it before her case came on. She wrote to the editor on the eve of the trial, stating that the Press alone could enable her to clear her character, and imploring his aid in securing publicity to the report of her case. When the trial was over, finding that it was not reported, she sent 'The Times' the report as it appeared in the 'Morning Post,' and begged them to be kind enough to give the report the benefit of the publicity of their columns.

But to all these appeals 'The Times' remained stone deaf. Not one word about her case was allowed to appear in the leading journal until the appeal against Mr Justice Butt's decision was heard before Lords Justices Cotton, Bowen, and Fry. Then the boycott was relaxed, and a brief report, touching solely upon the question of the discretion of the Judge to refuse to make the decree absolute, was allowed to appear. Now, why did 'The Times' boycott Mrs Langworthy ?

Perhaps the incident in the next chapter may throw some light upon the influences which may have been at work.