Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 72

West Coast Mail

West Coast Mail.

In looking through Mr. McKenzie's new Press Bill one cannot help wondering what his colleagues are about to let this illiterate Minister have his way in the matter, and seek to set up and promulgate a law that our greatest jurists have been nonplussed at. The Bill apparently seeks to define what libel is, but, as most people know, the intricacies of what is and what is not libel are so great and manifold that judges and juries alike have usually been considerably puzzled to define it. There is an old saying that "Fools rush in where angels fear to tread," and this may well be applied to the present case. The present Bill, instead of limiting the law of libel, as one would suppose from the title, attaches privileges to certain forms thereof which, under the existing law, are page 19 not privileged, i.e., it gives privilege where the publication is without malice to the paper which publishes a signed paper, which is not given under the existing law. The new Bill provides that every article or letter must have attached the full name and address of the writer, otherwise the editor, proprietor, printer, and publisher are severally liable to fines varying from £5 to £50, to be recovered summarily. Provided the name and address is appended to a letter, and it is published without malice, no one but the writer is liable for libel. The fines above mentioned are to be no bar to civil or criminal proceedings for libel. As everyone knows, at present the editor, printer, or publisher of a paper is liable, even supposing the writer of a libellous letter does append his name, the aggrieved person nevertheless has his remedy against the newspaper or the writer. The more one reads the present Bill the more convinced one is that Mr. McKenzie intends it as a burlesque, or, as the Post puts it, "on a par with Mr. Buckland's Washers and Manglers Bill."