Libel trial of Joseph Howe

Last updated
Libel Trial of Joseph Howe, Supreme Court (current Legislative Library), Province House (Nova Scotia) by Louis-Philippe Hebert JosephHoweProvinceHouseNovaScotia.png
Libel Trial of Joseph Howe, Supreme Court (current Legislative Library), Province House (Nova Scotia) by Louis-Philippe Hébert

The Libel trial of Joseph Howe was a court case heard 2 March 1835 in which newspaper editor Joseph Howe was charged with seditious libel by civic politicians in Nova Scotia. Howe's victory in court was considered monumental at the time. In the first issue of the Novascotian following the acquittal, Howe claimed that "the press of Nova-Scotia is Free." [1] Scholars, such as John Ralston Saul, have argued that Howe's libel victory established the fundamental basis for the freedom of the press in Canada. [2] Historian Barry Cahill writes that the trial was significant in colonial legal history because it was a long delayed replay of the Zenger case (1734). [3]

Contents

Background

During the year 1834, Howe was starting to attract attention to himself due to his strong independent viewpoints in his editorials in the Novascotian , the Government was starting to take notice. [4] Howe had eventually reached his breaking point and in late 1834 wrote in the Novascotian that he was going to start a campaign in the interest of bringing to light the wrongful actions of government. [5] On January 1, 1835, the final piece of this campaign was published in the Novascotian, a letter signed "The People". [6]

This letter accused the magistrates of, "reprehensible irresponsibility, incompetence, and self-interestedness in the conduct of their responsibilities." [7] Specifically, in the letter Joseph Howe accused Halifax politicians and police of pocketing £30,000 over a thirty-year period. Due to the letter being published, Howe was put on trial for seditious libel, being charged with "seditiously contriving, devising, and intending to stir up and incite discontent and sedition among His Majesty's subjects." [8] The crime of seditious libel had only been defined 200 years prior to the time of Howe's trial and was seen by many as an unfair crime as it could be as broad or as specific as the court chose." [9]

Trial

The trial took place in the present day library of Province House (Nova Scotia) and the judge in the case was Brenton Halliburton. Howe represented himself in the trial as no lawyer would defend him. Howe used as the basis of his argument the Libel Act 1792 (32 Geo. 3. c. 60). [10] He presented for six and a quarter hours addressing the jury, citing case after case of civic corruption. He spoke eloquently about the importance of press freedom, urging jurors "to leave an unshackled press as a legacy to your children." Even though the judge instructed the jury to find Howe guilty, jurors took only ten minutes to acquit him. [8]

Legacy

The victory of Howe in the court was considered monumental at the time. In the first issue of the Novascotian following the acquittal, Howe claimed that "the press of Nova-Scotia is Free." [1] Some scholars have argued that Howe's libel victory changed little in the strict legal sense; other scholars, however, insist that the case established the fundamental basis for the freedom of the press in Canada. [11]

Joseph Howe scholar J. M. Beck argues that, though Howe was victorious convincing a jury that the libel law was unjust, his trial had no immediate effect on changing the civil or criminal code with respect to libel. Beck asserts that the idea that Howe's trial contributed to the freedom of the press in Canada is a, "myth that has little basis in fact". [1] [12] In fact, eight years after the trial, Howe's successor at the Novascotian Richard Nugent was charged and found guilty of libel (1843). [1] Nugent was imprisoned due to his inability to pay damages. [1] Beck also notes that in 1843, the British Parliament passed a law that allowed the accused to use truth of the libel as their defence, which led to freedom of the press. [1]

Scholars have agreed with the strict legal sense of Beck's argument. However, scholar Cecil Rosner states, "The Howe trial is noteworthy more for its symbolic effect than any legal precedent it may have set...charges of sedition have largely disappeared [but] journalists across the country continue to face civil libel threats...". [8] [13]

Lyndsay M. Campbell argues that the trial did eventually change the law. Howe was the first in Nova Scotia to argue intent before a jury. [12] Campbell also notes that while Howe's defence did not persuade the presiding judge, it was a defense that would be used by lawyers in future cases. [14] Howe changed how the law was perceived by both the legal profession and by the general public. [15] The timing of the trial was crucial to the lasting effect it had on Canada. It occurred when the number of newspapers was growing rapidly and they were all pushing their own boundaries when it came to political commentary. [16] Howe's trial removed the fear of prosecution from these newspapers for having political commentary of their own, as Campbell puts it, "The sense of what was possible had changed." [16]

John Ralston Saul states that by, "...winning his acquittal, Howe established the fundamental ideas, principles, and shapes of freedom of speech and freedom of the press in Canada." [17] Saul acknowledges that, in terms of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, the laws have regressed and progressed multiple times since Howe's trial. Saul argues that Howe created the, "...intellectual foundation of how we still struggle to solidify and to widen the nature of freedom of speech and of the press." [17] Saul states that Howe's trial also had a significant influence on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He argues there is a clear link between Howe's defense and lines 9 and 10 of the Charter, which refer to freedom of speech and freedom of the press. [18] Saul also references many public leaders across Canada since Howe's trial who were influenced by him, such as Fred Dickson who was the leader of the 1919 Winnipeg Strike on trial for seditious libel, who read Howe's defence was their own to, "speak from an ethical center in their own public lives." [19]

Film

In 1961, the National Film Board of Canada (NFB) produced a 28-minute film about the trial entitled Joseph Howe: The Tribune of Nova Scotia. [20] [21]

See also

Related Research Articles

<i>Hansard</i> Transcripts of parliamentary debates in Britain and many Commonwealth countries

Hansard is the name of the transcripts of parliamentary debates in Britain and many Commonwealth countries. It is named after Thomas Curson Hansard (1776–1833), a London printer and publisher, who was the first official printer to the Parliament at Westminster.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Ralston Saul</span> Canadian writer and political philosopher

John Ralston Saul is a Canadian writer, political philosopher, and public intellectual. Saul is most widely known for his writings on the nature of individualism, citizenship and the public good; the failures of manager-led societies; the confusion between leadership and managerialism; military strategy, in particular irregular warfare; the role of freedom of speech and culture; and critiques of the prevailing economic paradigm. He is a champion of freedom of expression and was the International President of PEN International, an association of writers. Saul is the co-founder and co-chair of the Institute for Canadian Citizenship, a national charity promoting the inclusion of new citizens. He is also the co-founder and co-chair of 6 Degrees, the global forum for inclusion. Saul is also the husband to the former governor general Adrienne Clarkson, making him the Viceregal consort of Canada during most of her service (1999–2005).

Jury nullification (US/UK), jury equity (UK), or a perverse verdict (UK) occurs when the jury in a criminal trial gives a not guilty verdict regardless of whether they believe a defendant has broken the law. The jury's reasons may include the belief that the law itself is unjust, that the prosecutor has misapplied the law in the defendant's case, that the punishment for breaking the law is too harsh, or general frustrations with the criminal justice system. Some juries have also refused to convict due to their own prejudices in favor of the defendant. Such verdicts are possible because a jury has an absolute right to return any verdict it chooses.

Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech or organization, that tends toward rebellion against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent toward, or insurrection against, established authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interest of sedition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Peter Zenger</span> German printer and journalist (1697–1746)

John Peter Zenger (October 26, 1697 – July 28, 1746) was a German printer and journalist in New York City. Zenger printed The New York Weekly Journal. He was accused of libel in 1734 by William Cosby, the royal governor of New York, but the jury acquitted Zenger, who became a symbol for freedom of the press.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Joseph Howe</span> Canadian politician (1804–1873)

Joseph Howe was a Nova Scotian journalist, politician, public servant, and poet. Howe is often ranked as one of Nova Scotia's most admired politicians and his considerable skills as a journalist and writer have made him a provincial legend.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1835 in Canada</span>

Events from the year 1835 in Canada.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Annand</span> Premier of Nova Scotia (1808–1887)

William Annand was a Nova Scotia publisher and politician. He was a member of the North British Society.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Angus Lewis Macdonald</span> Canadian lawyer and politician (1890–1954)

Angus Lewis Macdonald, popularly known as 'Angus L.', was a Canadian lawyer, law professor and politician from Nova Scotia. He served as the Liberal premier of Nova Scotia from 1933 to 1940, when he became the federal minister of defence for naval services. He oversaw the creation of an effective Canadian navy and Allied convoy service during World War II. After the war, he returned to Nova Scotia to become premier again. In the election of 1945, his Liberals returned to power while their main rivals, the Conservatives, failed to win a single seat. The Liberal rallying cry, "All's Well With Angus L.," was so effective that the Conservatives despaired of ever beating Macdonald. He died in office in 1954.

<i>Novascotian</i>

The Novascotian was a newspaper published in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. It became one of the most influential voices in the British North American colonies in its nearly one century of existence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Province House (Nova Scotia)</span>

Province House in Halifax is where the Nova Scotia legislative assembly, known officially as the Nova Scotia House of Assembly, has met every year since 1819, making it the longest serving legislative building in Canada. The building is Canada's oldest house of government. Standing three storeys tall, the structure is considered one of the finest examples of Palladian architecture in North America.

Seditious libel is a criminal offence under common law of printing written material with seditious purpose — that is, the purpose of bringing contempt upon a political authority. It remains an offence in Canada but has been abolished in England and Wales.

Richard Nugent was a Canadian newspaperman.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Brenton Halliburton</span>

Sir Brenton Halliburton was the eighth Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Benjamin Russell (Canadian politician)</span> Canadian politician

Benjamin Russell was a Canadian lawyer, professor of law, judge, and politician in the province Nova Scotia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">SPEECH Act</span> 2010 U.S. law limiting foreign defamation cases

The Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage (SPEECH) Act is a 2010 federal statutory law in the United States that makes foreign libel judgments unenforceable in U.S. courts, unless either the foreign legislation applied offers at least as much protection as the U.S. First Amendment, or the defendant would have been found liable even if the case had been heard under U.S. law.

<i>Case of the Dean of St Asaph</i>

The Case of the Dean of St Asaph, formally R v Shipley, was the 1784 trial of William Davies Shipley, the Dean of St Asaph, for seditious libel. In the aftermath of the American War of Independence, electoral reform had become a substantial issue, and William Pitt the Younger attempted to bring a Bill before Parliament to reform the electoral system. In its support Shipley republished a pamphlet written by his brother-in-law, Sir William Jones, which noted the defects of the existing system and argued in support of Pitt's reforms. Thomas FitzMaurice, the brother of British Prime Minister Earl of Shelburne, reacted by indicting Shipley for seditious libel, a criminal offence which acted as "the government's chief weapon against criticism", since merely publishing something that an individual judge interpreted as libel was enough for a conviction; a jury was prohibited from deciding whether the material was actually libellous. The law was widely seen as unfair, and a Society for Constitutional Information was formed to pay Shipley's legal fees. With financial backing from the society Shipley was able to secure the services of Thomas Erskine KC as his barrister.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trial of Thomas Paine</span> Libel trial in England in 1792

The trial of Thomas Paine for seditious libel was held on 18 December 1792 in response to his publication of the second part of the Rights of Man. The government of William Pitt, worried by the possibility that the French Revolution might spread to England, had begun suppressing works that espoused radical philosophies.

<i>The New York Weekly Journal</i> Newspaper

The New York Weekly Journal was a weekly journal, printed by John Peter Zenger, from November 5, 1733 to March 18, 1751. It was the second journal in New York City and the only one that criticized New York Royal governor William Cosby, for which reason the journal was burned in its first year and John Zenger was put in prison. Zenger was released without charges, this being one of the earliest cases where a fight for the freedom of press led to a victory in America.

Timothy Houghton was the founder of Chester, Nova Scotia (1759). In the wake of the American patriot rebellion in the Siege of Fort Cumberland during the American Revolution, while Chief magistrate and Justice of the Peace for the Chester township, he was jailed for betraying the Loyalist cause. Among other crimes, he was accused of helping American privateer prisoners escape back to Boston. According to historian Barry Cahill, this trial was the most important court proceedings against a New England Planter patriot along Nova Scotia’s South Shore, which included the Townships of Liverpool, Yarmouth and Barrington. One of his four accusers was John Umlach of the Royal Nova Scotia Volunteer Regiment. Through the trials for sedition, the Nova Scotia (Loyalist) government at Halifax was able to establish the “legal repression and the general criminalization of political dissent.” Houghton's trial was only one of two in the province that were successfully prosecuted.

References

Footnotes

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Beck (1974), 39.
  2. Saul, p. 10; Kesterton, pp. 21–23.
  3. Cahill, p. 563
  4. Chisholm, 7.
  5. Rosner, 11.
  6. Beck (1974), 31.
  7. Campbell, 80.
  8. 1 2 3 Rosner, 12.
  9. Seditious libel
  10. Cahill, 1996, p. 360
  11. Saul, p. 10
  12. 1 2 Campbell, 114.
  13. Rosner argues that Canadian law restricts the sources that journalists may use, and despite the introduction of Freedom of the Press in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms courts are still limiting press rights if they deem it necessary; Quebec does not accept truth as an appropriate defense for a libel case; and while journalists in the United States of America enjoy the ability to criticize their elected representatives without risk of prosecution, Canadian journalists do not have the same protection. Rosner concludes that "...more victories remain to be won".
  14. Campbell, 115.
  15. Campbell, 115-116
  16. 1 2 Campbell, 116.
  17. 1 2 Saul, 10.
  18. Saul, 11.
  19. Saul, 14.
  20. "Joseph Howe: The Tribune of Nova Scotia". NFB. Retrieved 2014-09-16.
  21. "Joseph Howe: The Tribune of Nova Scotia". Internet Movie Database . Retrieved 2014-09-16.

Works cited