Go back to Table of Contents
Zacherle, Hedo M. "Pretrial Fact Press Reports as Contempt." Iowa Law Review, 39:738-49, Summer 1953. Z1
Notes on cases, 1858-1953.
Zall, Paul M. "Lord Eldon's Censorship." PMLA, 68:436-43, June 1953. Z2
Action taken against Byron's Don Juan and Cain as well as Southey's Wat Tyler, and Shelley's Queen Mab, "lay in the moral and legal principles of the Chancellor, Lord Eldon." The author reviews Lord Eldon's career as "licenser of the press." The Chancellor, using the argument that a work of "injurious nature" was not entitled to protection under the copyright law, refused to grant injunction for piratical publishing of Southey's Wat Tyler (Southey v. Sherwood). The failure of the Chancellor to grant an injunction from publication of a work which he thought censurable, actually resulted in the broader dissemination of such literature.
Zeitlin, Jake. "Who Shall Silence All the Airs and Madrigals?" Library Journal, 90:2479-83, 1 June 1965. Z3
An American bookseller discusses censorship in a paper delivered at the California Library Association Conference. While admitting his own embarrassment at the careless use of four-letter words and his revulsion to violence, brutality, and sexual depravity depicted in some books, he concludes that no one is so wise and universally competent to tell others: "You shall not express yourself thus, you shall not describe your own experiences; or depict the fantasies which your mind has created; or laugh at what others have set up as respectable; or question old beliefs; or contradict the dogmas of the church, of our society, our economic system, and our political orthodoxy."
Zelermyer, William. Invasion of Privacy. Syracuse, N.Y., Syracuse University Press, 1959. 161p. Z4
The purpose of this work is to present for the enlightenment of the general public "the development of the right of privacy as a concept in the realm of civil wrongs called torts." Included are chapters on invasion by advertising; invasion by magazines, newspapers, and books; and invasion by moving pictures, radio, and television.
[Zenger, John Peter]. A brief Narrative of the Case and Tryal of John Peter Zenger, Printer of the New-York Weekly Journal. New York, Printed and sold by John Peter Zenger, 1736. 40p. Z5
John Peter Zenger was the printer of the New-York Weekly Journal, which opposed the administration of Governor Cosby, thereby incurring his wrath. The publisher of the Journal and author of most of the offending articles was the brilliant young politician and lawyer, James Alexander. Because of the libel laws, however, it was Zenger the printer who stood trial. After other methods of silencing the paper had failed, Governer Cosby had the printer arrested for seditious libel. The bail was set so high that Zenger had to remain in jail. His wife continued to print the paper in his absence. Alexander planned Zenger's defense, but was summarily removed by Chief Justice James Delancy. At this point the distinguished Andrew Hamilton took over for the defense, conducting what is considered a classic performance. Zenger was acquitted by the jury, despite an unfriendly judge, and the results were widely acclaimed throughout the colonies and in England. The trial is important in the development of freedom of the press in America because of several precedents it set: it challenged the official censorship of the representative of the Crown; it introduced for the first time in an American court the proposition that the people have a right to know the facts about their government; it established "truth" as a mitigating factor in libel cases; and it established the right of the jury in libel cases to consider the law as well as the fact of publication, a practice not established in England until after the Fox Libel Act of 1792. Three heroes emerged from this celebrated trial: Zenger for his courage in standing trial, Alexander for the brilliant planning of the trial and the careful recording of the proceedings, and Hamilton for his notable forensic performance in court. Leonard W. Levy describes Alexander as "the first colonial figure to develop a philosophy of a free press," and the report of the trial as "the most widely known source of libertarian thought in England and America during the eighteenth century." This is the first edition of the Zenger trial, believed to have been written by James Alexander. Numerous editions followed both in America and England. These are recorded, along with a reprinting of the text of the first edition, in Rutherfurd's John Peter Zenger (1904). The text of the first edition is also reprinted in the Crippled Turtle edition, edited by Frank Luther Mott (1954), and in the Belknap Press edition, edited by Stanley N. Katz (1963).
[-------.] A Brief Narrative of the Case and Trial of John Peter Zenger, Printer of the New York Weekly Journal. By James Alexander. Edited by Stanley Nider Katz. Cambridge, Mass., Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1963. 238p. (The John Harvard Library) Z6
"The present edition supplements the Brief Narrative with other major documents of the Zenger case. It is also the first to attempt a full identification of the documents, people, and ideas that appear in the pamphlet. It seeks in this way to explain the case more completely than before by restoring it to its original context." A lengthy introduction brings the consideration of modern scholarship to the implications of the Zenger trial. Katz points out that Attorney Hamilton, refuting current English law, contended that truth was a defense against an accusation of libel and that the jury had the right to return a general verdict. While Alexander's law was weak, his logic was strong and his plea for the right to criticize the government appealed to the jury. Zenger was freed amidst great public acclaim, but the case did not immediately change the law of libel. "It was seventy years before the doctrine prophetically annunciated in 1735 by Andrew Hamilton became law in New York, and then the formulation was not his but Alexander Hamilton's." Editor Katz believes the account of the trial was probably Alexander's reworking of Hamilton's rough draft. The following documents are printed in this edition: Appendix A, Selections from Zenger's Press. Appendix B, The briefs of James Alexander and John Chambers, and the drafts of Zenger's speeches, prepared by Alexander. Appendix C, Two essays published in 1737--Anglo-Americanus' attack on the handling of the Zenger case, appearing originally in the Barbados Gazette, and James Alexander's response to the attack, appearing in four issues of Benjamin Franklin's Pennsylvania Gazette.
[-------]. "Trial of John Peter Zenger, for Libel, New York City, 1735." In American State Trials, vol. 16, pp. 1-39; in Chandler's American Criminal Trials, vol. 1, pp. 151-209; and in Howell, State Trials, vol. 17, pp. 675 ff.) Z7 §
[-------]. The Trial of John Peter Zenger, of New York, Printer: Who was charged with having printed and published a libel against the Government; and acquitted. With a narrative of his case. To which in now added, being never printed before, the Trial of Mr. William Owen, Bookseller, near Temple-Bar, Who was also charged with the Publication of a Libel against the Government; of which he was honourably acquitted by a Jury of Free-born Englishmen, Citizens of London. London, Printed by J. Almon, 1765. 59p. (This edition was reissued by the Works Projects Administration in 1940 as an Occasional Paper of the Sutro Branch, California State Library, San Francisco) Z8
This "new" edition of the Zenger trial, issued by J. Almon in 1765, includes the 1752 trial of William Owen, bookseller, acquitted of having published a seditious libel entitled, The Case of Alexander Murray. In the case of Mr. Owen, the jury ignored the judge's instructions to consider only the fact of publication and not the nature of the content, and found Owen "not guilty" on the whole of the case--facts, law, and justice.
[-------]. The Tryal of John Peter Zenger, of New-York, Printer, Who was lately Try'd and Acquitted for Printing and Publishing a Libel against the Government. With the Pleadings and Arguments on both Sides . . . 2d ed. London, Printed for J. Wilford, 1738. 32p. Z9
The first edition of the Zenger trial was published in New York by the printer himself in 1736 and given wide circulation throughout the colonies and in England. In 1738 four separate editions of the trial were published in London by J. Wilford. In the same year two other London publishers, Thomas Fleet and J. Roberts, brought out editions.
[-------]. Zenger's Own Story: A Brief Narrative of the Case and Tryal of John Peter Zenger . . . A Literal Reprint of the Original Pamphlet Printed by Zenger in New York in 1736. Columbia, Mo., Press of the Crippled Turtle, 1954. 45p. Z10
A preface and introduction by Frank Luther Mott describes the publishing history of the original pamphlet, and gives a brief biographical sketch of Zenger, including an imaginary conversation with James Alexander, leading to the publishing of the New-York Weekly Journal.
Zenger and Freedom of the Press. 35 mm filmstrip, 41 frames, b/w. Rego Park, N.Y., Heritage Filmstrips, 1954. Z11
The trial of John Peter Zenger, its implications and effects on the American Revolution and the Bill of Rights.
The Zenger Trial. 30 min., 7-inch phonotape. Boulder, Colo., National Tape Repository, University of Colorado. (American Adventure Series) Z12
For junior and senior high school use.
Zimmerman, Isabella M. "What About Paul Blanshard?" Bay State Librarian, 52:7-8, 14-18, 20, October 1962. Z13
A reference librarian at Boston University visited ten public libraries to discover how they handled nine titles considered objectionable to Roman Catholics--books by Paul Blanshard, Emmett McLoughlin, and Nikos Kazantzakis. She found that the anticipation of a complaint or protest by one religious group, or fear of an accusation of censorship from another such group has a tendency to influence a librarian's decision on selection of books. This influence depends, in almost direct proportion, on the vociferousness, strength, influence, and size of the complaining group, but it is sometimes counteracted by the strength, prestige, and professional stature of the library in the eyes of the community.
Zins, Thomas A. "Constitutional Law--Freedom of Speech--Not all Prior Restraints are Invalid." University of Cincinnati Law Review, 30:386-90, Summer 1961. Z14
Notes on Times Film Corp. v. City of Chicago, 81 Sup. Ct. 391 (1961).
Zinsser, William K. "The Bold and Risky World of 'Adult Movies.'" Life, 48:79-89, 29 February 1960. Z15
Franker films attract a more mature audience but put censorship responsibility on the home. "Classification" is suggested as one solution.
[Zola, Emile]. The Trial of Emile Zola Containing M. Zola's Letter to President Faure Relating to the Dreyfus Case, and a Full Report of the Fifteen Days' Proceedings in the Assize Court of the Seine, including the Testimony of the Witnesses and Speeches of Counsel. New York, Benjamin R. Tucker, 1898. 355p. Z16
The publication of Zola's open letter, J'Accuse, initiated the inquiry into the notorious Dreyfus Affair which rocked the French government. For his accusations against high officials of the army, the novelist Zola was convicted of libel. He fled to England, where a decade before his English publisher, Vizetelly, had been imprisoned for publishing Zola's novels. Benjamin Tucker, the American publisher of the report of the Zola trial, had been identified with freedom of the press since 1882 when, as a young man, he had offered to go to jail in Boston for publishing Whitman's Leaves of Grass.
Zuckman, Harvey L. "Censorship of Defamatory Political Broadcasts: The Port Huron Doctrine." New York University Law Review, 34:127-40, January 1959. Z17
Relates to the doctrine established by the FCC in the Port Huron Broadcasting Co. decision, 12 F.C.C. 1069 (1948), to the effect that broadcast licensees are not responsible for defamatory statements made during political broadcasts.
-------. "The Law of Obscenity and Military Practice." Military Law Review, 1963:43-64, April 1963. Z18 §
Two recent Army obscenity cases raise questions about legal practices with respect to obscenity under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The author discusses problems of special concern to the military in the light of civilian court decisions. Despite the difficulties in creating a precise legal doctrine, he urges the military lawyer, in the interest of society, to make the effort with intelligence and discrimination to enforce the obscenity laws.
-------. "Obscenity in the Mails." Southern California Law Review, 33:171-88, Winter 1960. Z19
"This article is devoted to an analysis of the present status of postal obscenity law and makes recommendations for legislative change where such action seems necessary or desirable."
|
Comments: Web Administrator Privacy Policy Last Updated |