REPORTER REFUSES TO TELL SOURCE OF INFORMATION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18960, 6 January 1930, Page 1

REPORTER REFUSES TO TELL SOURCE OF INFORMATION.

Journalist Stands Firm For Principle In Face Of Threat Of Imprisonment. (United Press Association.—By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.) (Received January 6, 10.30 a.m.) CAPE TOWN, January 5. The “ Rand Daily Mail ” described the drawing of a lottery in a Johannesburg Hotel a few weeks ago and the Minister of Justice under the Police Administration Act ordered an inquiry, to which the editor of the “Mail” and a reporter were summoned to give evidence. The magistrate held the inquiry in camera. The reporter admitted authorship of the story, but refused to disclose the names of those present, or the hotel where the lottery was drawn. He was warned that his refusal to divulge the information involved contempt of Court, for which there was a penalty of eight days’ imprisonment. To-day the reporter persisted in his attitude, his solicitor arguing that the whole system of journalism would be undermined if the police could insist on journalists revealing the sources of information given confidentially. The inquiry was adjourned until Wednesday. The Minister of Justice states that the law must take its course. The annual Congress of Journalists at Bloemfontein pledged their moral and financial support in defence of a great principle of journalism. A similar case occurred on November 1, when three reporters of the “ Washington Times ” (U.S.A.) were sent out by the City Editor to investigate liquor conditions. They published first person stories saying that they easily purchased liquor in forty-nine “ speakeasies.” The Grand Jury took up the matter but the trio of journalists refused to violate the ethics of their profession by testifying to the names and addresses where they bought the drinks. Judge Gordon of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia sentenced them to forty-five days’ imprisonmnt for contempt of Court.