The Star. MONDAY, JANUARY 4, 1869.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 201, 4 January 1869, Page 2

The Star. MONDAY, JANUARY 4, 1869.

— ♦ — The first day of January, 18G9, will be remembered by all wbo have any intimate connection with newspapers as the day on which " The Printers and Newspapers Registration Act 1868," came into force. The ostensible object of this Act — at all events as we read it — is to protect the public in cases of libel, and to prevent the publication of indecent pamphlets or books, &c. The real object of the Act, as most people of ordinary common sense will perceive when they read it, is to enable the Colonial Secretary to find out who are the proprietors of any newspaper, or any printing establishment. The colony is indebted to the Stafford Ministry for this Act, and, when the Premier's bitter hatred of newspapers is borne in mind, as well as the manner in which he has, to use a common phrase, " put the screw on" when he bad the power of compelling men to support the Government, it will be admitted that this Act, so minutely inquisitorial and so unnecessary, was framed with the special object of putting Mr Stafford in possession of information which he might find it convenient to obtain and to profitable use. Mr Stafford has frequently spoken bitterly against the colonial Press, and his colleague, the hon. Mr John Hall, has apparently contracted the same habit ; at any rate, the hon. gentleman recently made a charge against the Southern press, which, although expressly challenged to do so, he had not the courage to substantiate or the manliness to retract. It was Mr Stafford who issued the famous edict to the heads of departments and Q-eneral Government officers throughout the colony, that they were not to supply or allow their subordinates to supply any information to the newspapers. This absurd regulation, when it came to be put in force, was found to prevent the publication of much valuable and indeed necessary information, which the papers had usually supplied to their readers, and Mr Stafford was under the necessity — in deference to repeated expressions of public opinion — of explaining away or modifying his autocratic ukase. Again, the twelfth clause of the Act, which reads as follows, enables the Colonial Secretary, at any moment, to demand the names of the proprietors of any newspaper : — " When any per- " son desires to publish any newspaper " or when in any registered newspaper " any change is at any time made in " any of the particulars hereby required " to be stated respecting the same or " upon a written requisition from the " Colonial Secretary the publisher of " such newspaper shall deposit with " the Registrar an affi- " davit duly sworn and signed by the " proprietors of such newspaper and by " the persons intended to be the printer " and publisher thereof respectively." The public will naturally inquire why, and for what purpose, the Colonial Secretary should be specially empowered to pry into the private business of a newspaper — to ask at any moment who its proprietors are. What public interest or public good can be promoted by giving him such power ? Is it necessary in order that he may discharge his duty to the public ? The tendency of the Act we are now discussing is to destroy or check that spirit of fearless independence in the public Press, which is the best guarantee and guardian of the people's rights and liberties. If a certain person is known to be a proprietor of or shareholder in any newspaper, and if that newspaper, in the discharge of its duty to the public, should feel bouna to criticise severely the conduct of the Government or the Colonial Secretary, what is likely to be the consequence ? Every person connected with such newspaper — supposing Mr Stafford or anyone of his present colleagues to be in oflice — would be made to feel that he was a marked man, and that preferment in the public service was not for him. But the proprietor of or shareholder in a newspaper might hold an appointment in the public service; and,judging Mr Stafford by what he did in the \ case of Mr Crawford last year — on the Public Debts Act — opposition to th©

Government on the part of the paper might lead to such treatment aa io generally expressed in the familiar phrase—making his place too hot for him. We have no hesitation in saying that Mr Stafford's public conduct—conduct which the people of this colony know as well as we do and can at any time satisfy themselves about— justifies us in making these remarks, however reluctant we may be, and are, to do so. So far as this journal is individually concerned, we are indifferent to the inquisition of Mr Stafford's Act. We have complied with all its provisions, and we intend to pursue our career as if it did not exist, because we rely on that which the Premier of New Zealand has repeatedly outraged — the good sense, independence, and public spirit of the people. There is another and a more general ground on which we take objection to the Act under discussion. And the same objection applies to the larger portion of the legislation of the last three or four years, that is, since Mr Stafford came into power. The legislation to which we refer has been very aptly and very justly called the legislation of policemen, by means of which the Government is invested with petty, nagging, Paul-pry powers of inquisition over the actß of all citizens. In fact, a net of police interference is being gradually woven and drawn round the people, which has no parallel save in Prance and other countries with the same description of government. That the people will some day feel this and resent it with a just if not very temperate indignation, is only what we may expect. In the meantime, it is our duty to warn the public that such laws as we speak of are in force, and that others of a still more inquisitorial character have been attempted. For all these laws, and these attempts at legislation, we are indebted to Mr Stafford and his colleagues. Witness the " Police Offences Bill," which Mr Hall brought in and tried to nurse through the House. Why, it was the jest and by-word of the Assembly, Government supporters included. Strongly as we object to " The Printers and Newspapers Registration Act," it is now the law of the land, and all newspapers are bound to comply with it. The necessary affidavits have, we believe, been registered by our local journals, and tbe public have a right to inspect them at the Registrar's office, free of any charge.