New Hampshire Statesman And Concord Register

TRIAL FOR LIBEL.

We have received from a correspondent an article upon the trial lately published, of David L. Child, editor of the Massachusetts Journal, on a charge of libel against John Keyes, a Senator for the County of Middlesex.—The article is too long for admission in the present crowded state of our columns, and if it were not, we should prefer to recommend to the reader the pamphlet itself containing the trial, as but an inadequate opinion of it could be formed from this abridgment and commentary, without recurrence to the report at large.

We take this occasion to remark, that the editor of the Journal has been subjected to very serious inconvenience, in this as well as in another case, for the freedom with which he has discussed, with the most laudable motives, the official conduct of public men. We care not how strictly the publishers of the journals are called to account for any aspersion of the character of individuals, public or private, from a feeling of personal hostility, or from mere wantonness and indifference to the injury they do; but when the character and conduct of public officers, and candidates for office, are discussed, the welfare of the public, and the spirit of our government require that a favorable construction should be put upon the motives of the publisher, and that he should not be punished where there is no appearance of a malicious intention, and where no injury is done, other than what results from the publication of the truth.

In the cases referred to, it is evident that Mr Child was influenced by no other motives than the desire to discharge his duties faithfully to the public, by making known what he considered material to forming a correct judgment of the conduct of public officers. In the case reported in the pamphlet referred to, the trial exhibited a singular contradiction of testimony, under circumstances which seemed to entitle him to the benefit of that version of the transaction, most favorable to his defence. We cannot go into the particulars of the case, but again refer the reader to the report of the trial, which affords some amusing specimens of cross examination.—Bos. Dai. Adv.