Campbell against Spottiswoode

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date18 April 1863
Date18 April 1863
CourtCourt of the Queen's Bench

English Reports Citation: 122 E.R. 288

IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH AND THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER

Campbell against Spottiswoode

S. C. 3 F. & F. 421; 32 L. J. Q. B. 185; 8 L. T. 201; Jur. N. S. 1069; W. R. 569. Approved and followed, Merivale v. Carson, 1887, 20 Q. B. D. 283. Adopted, South Hetton Coal Company v. North Easter News Association, (1894) 1 Q. B. 145. Followed, Joynt v. Cycle Trade Publishing Company, (1904) 2 K. B. 292. Applied, Plymouth Mutual Co-operation and Industrial Society v. Traders' Publishing Association, (1906) 1 K. B. 412/ Discussed, Thomas v. Bradbury, (1906) 2 K. B. 627. Approved, Hunt v. Star, Newspaper Company, (1908) 2 K. B. 320; Walker v. Hodgson, (1909) 1 K. B. 250.

288 campbell, v. spottiswoode a b. & s. 7*9. [769] cases argued and determined in the queen's bench, in easter term, XXVI. victoria. The Judges who usually sat in Bane in this Term were:-Cockburn C.J., Cromp-ton J., Blackburn J., Mellor J. campbell a^atns^SPOTTZSWOODE. Saturday, April 18th, 1863.-Libel. Newspaper. Privilege. Bona fides.-1. When a writer in a newspaper or elsewhere, in commenting on public matters, makes imputations on the character of the individuals concerned in them, which are false and libellous, as being beyond the limits of fair comment, it is no defence that he bona fide believed in the truth of these imputations.-2. The plaintiff published in a newspaper, of which he was the editor and part proprietor, a proposal for inserting in it a series of letters on the duty of evangelizing the Chinese, and for promoting the circulation of the numbers of the paper in which those letters should appear in order to call attention to the importance of this work of evangelization. A series of letters accordingly appeared in the newspaper, and in the aame numbers lists of subscribers for copies of the paper for distribution. In an action of libel against the defendant, the publisher of another newspaper, for an article commenting on the plaintiff's scheme, imputing that his real object was to promote the sale of his paper, and suggesting that the names of some of the subscribers in the lists were fictitious, the jury found for the plaintiff, with the addition that the writer of the article believed the imputations in it to be well founded: Held, that this belief of the defendant was no answer to the action. [S. C. 3F.&R 421; 32 L. J. Q. B. 185 ; 8 L. T. 201 ; 9 Jur. N. S. 1069; 11 W. E. 569. Approved and followed, Merivak v. Carson, 1887, 20 Q. B. D. 283. Adopted, South Hetton Coal Company v. North Eastern Neios Association, [1894] 1 Q. B. 145. Followed, Joynt v. Cycle Trade Publishing Company, [1904] 2 K. B. 292. Applied, Plymouth Mutual Co-operation and Industrial Society v. Traders' Publishing Association, [1906] 1 K. B. 412. Discussed, Thomas v. Bradbury, [1906] 2 K, B. 627. Approved, Hunt v. Star Newspaper Company, [1908] 2 K. B. 320; Walker v. Hodgson, [1909] 1 K. B. 250.] Libel. The declaration stated that the plaintiff was a Protestant dissenting minister, and minister of a [770] congregation of Protestant dissenters, and the editor of a newspaper called The British Ensign, and had published the names or descriptions of divers persons as subscribers for and persons purchasing and promising to purchase copies of that newspaper; and the defendant falsely and maliciously printed and published of the plaintiff, to wit, in a periodical publication called The Saturday Review of Politics, Science, Literature and Art, a false, scandalous, malicious and defamatory libel; and in one part of which libel was contained the false, scandalous, malicious, defamatory and libellous matter following of and concerning the plaintiff, that is to say:-" The doctor " (meaning the plaintiff) " refers frequently to Mr. Thompson as his authority-so frequently, that we must own to having had a transitory suspicion that Mr. T. was nothing more than another Mrs. Harris, and to believe, with Mrs. Gamp's acquaintance, that there ' never was no such person.' But as Mr. Thompson's name is down for 5000 copies of The Ensign, we must accept his identity as fully proved, and we hope the 'publisher of The Ensign is equally satisfied on the point." And in another part of which said libel was also contained the false &c. matter following of and concerning the plaintiff, that is to say :-" To spread the knowledge of the gospel in China would be a good and an excellent thing, arid worthy of all praise and encouragement; but to make such a work a mere pretext for puffing an obscure newspaper into circulation is a most scandalous and flagitious act; and it is this act, we fear, we must charge against Dr. Campbell." And in another part of which said libel was also contained the false &c. matter following of and concerning the plaintiff, that is to say:-"There have been many dodges tried to make a losing paper ' go,'but it remained for a leader [771] in the Nonconformist body to represent the weekly subscription as an ace of religious duty. Moreover, the well known device is resorted to of publishing lista of subscribers, the authenticity of which the public have, to say 8 B.* 8.771 CAMPBELL V. SPOTTI8WOODE 289 the least, no means of checking. 'R. G.' takes 240 copies, 'A London Minister' 120, ' An Old Soldier' 100, and so on. Few readers, we imagine, will have any doubt in their minds at to who is the 'Old Soldier,'" meaning thereby that the plaintiff had falsely and deceitfully published, as the names or descriptions of subscribers for or purchasers o! the said newspaper, divers fictitious names or descriptions which did not in fact represent any persons really being subscribers for or purchasers of the said newspaper. And in another part of which said libel is also contained the false &o. matter following of and concerning the plaintiff, that is to say :-"For, whatever may be the private views of the editor of The Ensign" (meaning the plaintiff), " there can be no question that his followers are sincere enough in the confidence they repose in hii plan. It must be a very happy thing to be gifted with so large a stock of faith. It must take the sting out of many a sorrow, and smooth away many a trouble. The past cannot be very sad, nor the future very dreadful, to him who has the capacity for hoping all things and believing all things without hesitation. If this temper of mind should lay its possessor open occasionally to the beguilemeuts of an impostor" (meaning the plaintiff) "more than an equivalent is provided in its freedom from doubts and suspicions, and the sense of security that it confers." And in another part of which libel was also contained the false &c. matter following of and concerning the plaintiff, that is to say :-" No doubt it is deplorable to find an [772] ignorant credulity manifested among a class of the community entitled on many grounds to respect; but now and then this very credulity may be turned to good account. Dr. Campbell" (meaning the plaintiff) " is just now making use of it for a very practical purpose, and to-morrow some other religious speculator will cry his wares in the name of Heaven, and the mob will hasten to deck him out in purple and fine linen. When Dr. Campbell " (meaning the plaintiff) " has finished his Chinese letters, he will be a greater simpleton than we take him for if he does not force off another 100,000 copies of his paper by launching a fresh series of thunderbolts against the powers of darkness. In the meanwhile, there can be no doubt that he is making a very good thing indeed of the spiritual wants of the Chinese." And the plaintiff, by reason of the premises, has been greatly injured, scandalized and aggrieved. And the plaintiff claims 10001. Plea. Not guilty. On the trial, before Cockburn C.J., at the Sittings at Guildhall after Hilary Term, it appeared that the defendant was the printer of a weekly newspaper or periodical called The Saturday Review of Politics, Literature, Science and Art, and that the libels complained of were published in an article headed " The Heathens' Best Friend," contained in the number for June 14th, 1862. The plaintiff was a minister of a dissenting congregation, and the editor and part proprietor of The British Ensign and The British Standard, which were dissenting newspapers or periodicals. Extracts from the former were put in evidence, containing a proposal to publish in it a series of letters to the Queen and persons of note on the subject and duty of evangelizing the Chinese, and to promote [773] as widely as possible the circulation of the numbers of the paper in which those letters should appear, in order to call the attention of missionaries and others to the importance of this work o evangelization. A series o! letters accordingly appeared in The British Ensign, the three first of which, headed "Christian Missions," were addressed to the Queen, and the rest headed " China-Conversion of the Chinese," were addressed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Earl of Shaftesbury, Viscount Palmerston, Thomas Thompson, Esq., of Piior Park, Bath, and other persons ; and from time to time in the same numbers with the letters were published lists of subscribers for copies of the paper for distribution. In one of these lists were the following, "The Hon. Mrs. Thompson, 5000 copies; An Old Soldier, 100; K. G., 240; M. S. D. 10; J. S. 240; A. J. 30." The whole of the article in which the passages set forth in the declaration appeared was read to the jury. It was contended, on the part of the plaintiff, that the passages set forth in the declaration imputed to him the charge of fabricating fictitious subscription lists, and of trying to procure subscriptions professedly for the conversion of the heathen, but in reality for the purpose of putting money into his own pocket. The plaintiff himself and some of the subscribers, among whom was Mr. Thompson, were called as witnesses, to shew that such charges were without foundation, and to prove the reality of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Simpson v. Mair et al., (2008) 376 N.R. 80 (SCC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • 27 June 2008
    ...84]. Soane v. Knight (1827), M. & M. 74; 173 E.R. 1086, generally [para. 86]. Campbell v. Spottiswoode (1863), 3 B. & S. 769; 122 E.R. 288, refd to. [para. Charleston v. News Group Newspapers Ltd. et al., [1995] 2 A.C. 65; 184 N.R. 321; [1995] 2 W.L.R. 450 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 97......
  • Joseph and Others v Spiller and Another
    • United Kingdom
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 December 2010
    ...other matters of public interest and, in particular, to the acts of persons in public life – Turnbull v Bird (1861) 2 F & F 508. 34 Campbell v Spottiswoode (1863) 3 B & S 769 is perhaps the most important foundation stone of the modern law of fair comment. The plaintiff was a dissenting Pro......
  • Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 28 October 1999
    ...regarded by the common law as a basic right, long before the emergence of human rights conventions. In 1863 Crompton J. observed in Campbell v. Spottiswoode (1863) 3 B. & S. 769, 779, that 'it is the right of all the Queen's subjects to discuss public matters'. The defence is wide in its sc......
  • Simpson v. Mair et al., (2008) 256 B.C.A.C. 1 (SCC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • 27 June 2008
    ...84]. Soane v. Knight (1827), M. & M. 74; 173 E.R. 1086, refd to. [para. 86]. Campbell v. Spottiswoode (1863), 3 B. & S. 769; 122 E.R. 288, refd to. [para. Charleston v. News Group Newspapers Ltd. et al., [1995] 2 A.C. 65; 184 N.R. 321; [1995] 2 W.L.R. 450 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 97]......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT