South Canterbury Times. MONDAY, OCTOBER 29, 1883.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 3299, 29 October 1883, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. MONDAY, OCTOBER 29, 1883.

The law of libel is an engine which is apt to injure those who guide it little less than those at whom it is directed, and nobody should be better acquainted with that fact than a lawyer. Even a victory of the most complete character is almost too dearly bought. For in the course of the suit, a great deal comes out on both sides that adds nothing to the reputation of either, and tongues are set a-wagging in every direction, and nobody ever gains by that. A really good name is never seriously affected by slander. At any rate, it is only temporarily affected, and very soon asserts and vindicates itself. It is therefore impossible to avoid regret, when one sees a man whose pursuits should tend to inspire him with wisdom, to give him mental equanimity, and to strengthen his faculty of judgment, making a fool of himself over the law of libel. This, we are bound to say, the plaintiff did in the recent libel action in Dunedin. Mr Denniston everyone knows to be a very able advocate, with talent enough to raise him to a very respectable rank in bis profession ; but we also know that be has absolutely no control over his temper, and has fatal propensity for falling foul of the Bench. Everybody knows these things, and the writer of “Passing Notes ” only expressed a very general sentiment when he wrote what he did about the learned gentleman. “ The greater the truth the greater the libel,” however, and Mr Denniston was sorely aggrieved at the comments of “Civis.” Now, if Mr Denniston bad been a wise man he would have taken to selfexamination, and satisfied himself whether or not his conduct in Court bad afforded any justification for the comments in question. Had he done so, be would have recognised that they were warranted, and would in future have kept a check upon himself. Not being a wise man, he rushed into Court and evoked still more general comment of an unfavorable nature. We have no particular admiration for the writings of “ Civis.” On the contrary, we deprecate their tone as generally egotistical and often calculated to wound. A writer who touches upon the events of life around him, and presents them to the public in an entertaining style, should write with pungency, but be should not stab. It is possible to lightly “take off” p rominent characteristics of individuals, without inflicting upon them a wound more than skin-deep, and “ Civis ” certainly went deeper than the skin in dealing with Mr Denniston. The account of the proceedings in the case is very good reading, indeed. It is specially amusing to observe the ability to hold their own against even -an eminent counsel like Mr Stout, which the newspaper men displayed in the witness box. Mr Stout scored no points at their expense; indeed one might venture to say that whatever points were scored, were scored by the Pressmen. We may be pardoned for indulging in some satisfaction at the manner in which these gentlemen maintained the honor of the profession of journalism. As we have said, however, we cannot but regret that an.ahle barrister should have taken up' the cudgels. to defend himself against ephemeral writings that would nfiver have injured him in the smallest degree in his practice, however much they might have wounded his vanity.