[assault - contempt, press commentary - law reporting]

R. v. Connell

Supreme Court of Van Diemen's Land

Montagu J., 16 March 1835

Source: Cornwall Chronicle, 21 March 1835

William Gilbert Connell, for an assault upon the Police Magistrate, received sentence of 12 months imprisonment in gaol, and to be further imprisoned until he furnished bail, himself in 100l., and two sureties in 50l. each to keep the peace towards the Police Magistrate, and all his Majesty’s objects, for 12 calendar months, from the expiration of his sentence. The defendant conducted his own case, and read a voluminous defence, wherein he censured the conduct of the public Journals for having commented on it, prior to its being heard before a tribunal of his country. We consider his remarks deserved. It is unfair to send forth to the world any version of a transaction, the merits of which are likely at a subsequent period to be decided by a Jury. We regret that it too commonly occurs in the Press of this Colony.

* * *

After His Honor Judge Montagu had closed the proceedings of the Criminal Court on Thursday last, Mr. Attorney General Stephen rose and stated, that any person publishing the defence made by Mr. Connell, upon his trial, would be making himself guilty of an indictable offence, and if any one did publish it, he pledged himself to indict him accordingly. We beg leave respectfully to differ in opinion from the learned gentleman, as to the right of publishing. We have been taught to believe, that the proceedings of an English Court of Justice, were considered fit matter for publication. We never before heard the publication of them forbidden by a law officer, holding a high situation under the British Crown; and we cannot avoid thinking that the Attorney General does not possess power to control the Press at his pleasure. We fully agree with the gentlemen, as to the motive for restraining the publication of the defence, and think his caution in the matter perfectly unnecessary.