IS THE EAULy TASMANIAN TRESS, ETC. 



corruption, and improper t;ondiu't against the Governor. 

 Bent appeared before the Supreme Court several times, 

 and, after jDrolonged trials and re-trials (41), was sentenced, 

 on the verdict ol a military jui^, to six months" imi^rison- 

 ment, and to fines which, along with counsels fees, 

 amounted to £518 (42). 



In the eyes of many free settlers this heavy punish- 

 ment appeared to be flagrant persecution of a man who for 

 ten years had struggled hard to keep the island provided 

 with a newsiDaper. In July, 1826, a meeting was called 

 of all ''Friends of the Liberty of the Press, " at which a 

 subscription list w^as openecl for Bents benefit, and 

 eventually Bent was recouped for his losses to the extent 

 of about £250 (43). When liberated, the indomitable 

 printer coiitinued his former policy, with Murray 

 ("Colonist") as editor of the Colonial Times. The paper 

 became more than ever the organ of the malcontents, and 

 the medium for scurrilous attacks on Arthur. No story 

 was too bad to be true, and, according to the columns of 

 the Colonial Times, the Governor and his minions were 

 greedy, corrupt, tyrants, who were fast driving the colony 

 into bankruptcy and revolt. Arthur meditated further 

 reprisals, and eai'ly in January, 1827, ordered another 

 prosecution for libel against Bent, who had reprinted from 

 the AuHtralian, a mainland paper, an extract which Arthur 

 deemed to be personally offensive and libellous. Even 

 the Gazette protested against this action (44), and the 

 prosecution was withdrawn, in favour of measures for im- 

 posing legislative restraint on the whole press. 



Arthur's attit-udo, though the cause of much vitupera-- 

 tion at the time, calls for a certain amount of symjDathy. 

 He was in a difficult situation as the head of a colony 

 which was at the same time a home of convicts and of free 

 settlers. The free men, whose voices were heard in Bent's 

 cclnmns, were clamouring for the libei-ties they had en- 

 joyed at Home, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, 

 trial by jurv, and representative responsible government. 

 But the convict system made the granting of some, if not 

 all, of these demands well-nigh impossible. Arthur's 

 character and military training made him indifferent to 

 such co'n^^titutional trifles. His business was to keep the 

 convicts in order, and, as a secondary consideration, to de- 

 velop the resources of the colony. But anything which 

 militated against order amongst the convicts must be sup- 

 pressed, even if it entailed the denial of citizenship to the 

 free settlers. Hence, a perfectly free press, with the 

 right to criticise as it pleased, was impossible. Discipline 

 and quiet amongst the prisoners w\as the prime necessity; 



