189
Mixed fact & comment.
od. p. 192.
P. 193.
that di sgraceful acts have been committed
It is
or discreditable language use ả,
one thing to comment upon or criticize
even with severity the acknowledged or
proved acts of a public man and quite
another to assert that he has been guilty
of particular acts of mis-conduc t".
The jury must be satisfied that so much
as alleges Tact is true, so much as expresses defendants opinion on these
facts relates to a matter of public
interest and does not exceed the limits
of fair critici em. If the de fen đạn t
accurately states what some public man
bas really done and then asserts such
conduct is disgraceful, this is merely
comment on the plaintiff's conduct. So,
if without setting it out, ne identifies
the conduct on which no comments by
clear reference,
The same considerations apply when a
defendant has drawn from certain facts
an inference derogatory to the plaintiff,
If he states the bare inference, without
the facts on which it is based, auch
inference will be treated as an allega-
tion of fact. But it he sets out the
tacts correctly and then gives nis
interence stating it as his inference
from those facts such inference will, AS
a rule, be deemed a comment. But even in
this case the writer must be careful to
-17-
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.