Address by Dr. Garnett. 305 for sixteen years, it was read by one of Mrs. Martin's friends. Mrs. Martin forthwith brought an action, not against the friend, but against the British Museum. The pamphlet had been with- drawn the moment its character was pointed out ; the trustees expressed their regret, but because they would not give up the name of the vendor of the book and publish an apology in the newspapers, Mrs. Martin would have the law of them. I mention this in no unkindness to our fair adversary, but to show the risk to which you may be exposed should you have to deal with a litigious, or, let us say, a highly sensitive person. To show the difficulty you would have in protecting yourselves, I may mention that Mrs. Martin's friend had to read through 118 pages (I think that was the number) before he could find the libel. And, most important point of all, although this wretched pam- phlet was the only publication brought prominently forward at the trial, Mrs. Martin's complaint embraced books of real his- torical importance, such as a library like the Museum was abso- lutely bound to have upon its shelves, but in which she was disrespectfully mentioned. Now, it is impossible to write con- temporary history without making statements which must hurt or offend individuals, and it is impossible to say in what corner of almost any book something may not lurk which may con- ceivably be actionable. Mrs. Martin's case certainly did not afford much encouragement to similar proceedings. She lost her cause, and I may add that the immunity of booksellers in similar cases, which seems to imply that of librarians, was laid down most distinctly by Mr. Justice Wills in the remarkable action of Mrs. Weldon against certain booksellers for vending libels upon her. Still, we have all heard of the glorious uncer- tainty of the law, and one successful, or even unsuccessful action of this kind would do great harm to free libraries by intimidating gentlemen of standing from acting upon their committees. I therefore think it would be well if all libraries were once for all protected by a short Act exempting them from proceedings in similar cases, and especially enacting that books in which the matter complained of was casual and not the very stuff and substance of the production, should never be liable to be with- drawn ; neither should bond-fide controversial tracts in which feeling might be carried too far. Libellous attacks on private character should undoubtedly be excluded, but even there the complainant should be required to institute proceedings against the author or publisher, pending the result of which the book
