"No one can doubt the importance," is the language of Judge Story, "in a free government of the right to canvass the acts of public men and the tendency of public measures—to censure boldly the conduct of rulers and to scrutinize the policy and plans of government."
The language of the English courts is nearly as broad.
"God forbid that you should not be allowed to comment on the conduct of all mankind, providing you do it justly and honorably," says Baron Alderson.
Chief Justice Cockburn said: "It is of vast importance that criticism, so long as it is fair, reasonable and just, should be allowed the utmost latitude, and that the most unsparing censure of works which are fairly subject to it should not be held libelous."
CRITICISM DOES NOT EXTEND TO PERSON
But the privilege of criticism extends only to the actions or works of an individual; it does not extend to the person. In the case of an author, his works may be criticised as severely as the occasion demands. "Every man who publishes a book commits himself to the judgment of the public," says an eminent English judge; but this can not be made the excuse for personal abuse of the author himself.
The author, the artist, the architect, who produces a book, a painting or a building, is in this respect in the same position as the maker or producer of a watch, a piano or a carving-knife.
The thing produced in either case may be "criticised." But if the person who produces it is defamed, this must be defended, if at all, upon some other ground than that it is criticism.
Moreover, to justify such comment on men's actions or on the products of their hands or brains as criticism, it is essential that the acts or things so criticised should have actual existence.
For instance, a newspaper comments with great severity on certain occurrences which it publishes as the official acts of a mayor of its city. Before these strictures can be defended as criticism, it must appear that such official acts really occurred.