443
letter No.
nevertheless
217 of
the
last month but I am 27th of very glad, that the question is about to
be submitted to Her
Majesty's
Government from
whom I shall no doubt receive instructions should
my
views
be
erroneous.
In addition to what I before stated I may now add that I do not believe that the Law of
Libel was even
applicable to any part of India
where Teen's Courts and Judges
Judges had long been
established) until within
a
very
recent period.
I know myself of his instances in which injurines
semart's had been made on
the Government of
India at Calcutta, and on
The
Judges of the
Supreme Court : as the Queen's Court is termed)
at Bombay, and on
both these occasions the
junishment resnted to, was the deportation from India of the respective Editors (a power which the
Lical
local Governments held up to 1834. but even.
theme cases the offending Newspapers.
even, in
were not
suppressed ; and I happen further to know,
that the difported Editors
gave
much truble
in England, and that the measures taken against
them
were
considered
by the Home Authorities
to have been ill judged
May
aut routier in
own
opinion is
any
and uncalled for.
that the existing
Place interfering (except by
Law) to protect individual character or to
vindicate it when attached is open to many
once
gives
The Editor or attacking
objections. It at one
the celebrity which he
party
it uerally enlists
022
which he generaity seeks for,
the same side, ti : & impainy
of a large portion of society
(as was seen in the
cases
who
arc
Ú
led to believe.
quote above) that
the oppression of the stronger
over
The weaker,