The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-02-14

HeRald-Attempt Go Muzzlc tho Press.
We poblish. to day, legal curiosity, presented by
former Grand Jury, ct the mitigation Of the AIT
Union, in this city, In the shape Of an indictment
for libel for some remarks made by the NEw YoaH
HERALD, on the conduct Of the association during
the last year. Whether this ano nalous and unique
document wac drawn up by member CT the Grand
Jury or some outside practitioner, we have not yet
but il is such g monument Of the
legal skill of the Individual that be deserves extern
sye celebrity, and we thiakit would be worth while
TO offer reward Of twenty dollars 20 get his name,
IN order thatit might go down to the ls.eet posts-
rity, at the head at the tail OF tho illus.rious
names Of Bacon, and Blackstone, and Coke, aud
Kent, and Story and other great men dieting ushed
for their profound legal lere, critical scumen, and
lucid expositions Of common and statute law. We
understand that the present District Attorney dis
claims the paternity OF this wonderful paper, which
might well grace some future edition of DIS
raeh's Curiosites OF Literature" We believe that
tho counsel for the HERALD will bTiug the question
up before the Court OF Sessions to day. in the shape
Of motion 10 suash the indictment previous TO its
being sent to the Historical So,iety, when some
rich disclosures may be expected as TO the lottery
management Of the Ar. Union, and the node Of
procuring and getting up the precious document
itself.
This novel paper lie spread over an immense sur-
face, filed With repetitions Of names Of individuals
whom we believe to be very respectable members
ofsociety, and whose characters sssailed in
the slightest degree. II was merely the manage
ment of 3 c0rporaslon-that intangible, abstract
thing which is sort Of moral or immoral essen ,e-
that called forth our observations, and We never
thought of aluding to living, speaking men, having
"a local habi.ation and name" 1t is singular
fact that the clause of the indictment which gives
the language of the HERALD, alleged to be libel
Ious, is merely an argument against the truth and
common sense Of their own bulletin, or advertise
ment, published under their own direction, violat-
ing the pledge they had given the public, snd
postponing the drawing sine die. They stated il
their advertisement that it was necessary to make
this indefinite postponement on account 60. the
Kossuth excitem ent," and "a depression in COM
mercial affairs" The HERALD, in reply, and on
behalf Of the vicimised subscribers and the public,
declared the pretence to be equally "false and i'm
pudent'-that the Hungarian hubbub could have
had no such effect, and that the country was pros
porous to remarkable degree, particularly since
the California gold placers had been discovered.
The free discussion Of this postponement was the
right Of every man and every newspaper; and to
call the expression Of opinion upon il libel, IS
an abuse Of language, misnomer, that confounds
all distinction between falsehood and trush right
and wrong. The character Of no individual WIS
touched, but only the public management and tie
advertisements Of public institution, which ia lie.
climate subject for fair and open debate, even
under present libel laws, and where the instsu
tion is legal, constitutional, and com patible with
the dictates of morality and religion.
The next point in the Indictment is that tie
HERALD has charged the management with fool
sh and useless expenditure of money on new
journals Of an abolition character instead Of using
it for more appropriate purpose, connected with
the Institution itself. This is 9 simple matter of
fact, which was obvious to every one who read the
newspapers, and could not be denied by any Of the
managers themselves. But in addition to this
statement, the truth and accuracy Of whicl are
doubted, we said little or nothing about their pub.
fishing Of ridiculous production, Tor the las. two
years, called the cart Union Bulletin" showing
how they spent money uselessy in publishing works
without merit and then abusing the artists in their
own columns. In this there would have been no
libel If we had said it; but we did not, we say i.
now, and we are ready to prove it, if ever we
should be called upon to prove anything go no eri-
Gus to the world.
On these grounds we think there is sufficient
cause for quashing an indictment which cannot
hold water, and which is contrary to the Law OF
libel, and subversive of the right Of the press and
the public to discuss subject of public nature,
and which was handled in our columns without any
reference to the character Of individuals.
But there is stronger point in favor Of qusshing
the monster 1t is the UTTER unequivo,al ilegality
Of the Art Union itself. 1t is lottery-an afro
cious and barefaced lottery contrary to morality.
contrary to the constitution, and contrary to the
laws OF this State, as will be seen by reference to
the legal argument subjoined to the Indictment, in.
serted elsewhere in our columns. On that ground,
therefore, rest our case against this indictment
The management who chargeus with libel, were en-
gagged IN unlawful act; ard instead Of being per
mitted to 60 before the Grand Jury to ndict for
libel in having refuted their absurd reasons for
postponing the distribution Of the przes they ought
to have been indicted themselves, If the Grand Jury
had common sense or common decency more
impudcnt and atrocious proceeding was never be-
fore perpetrated in this city, or any other city in
the country.
AS to the conduct and management Of the Art
Union for the last few years, we have hardly begun
the investigation; but We shall soon commence and
then we shall make exposures that will astonish the
public. During the last ton years they have re-
ceived between $500 900 and 100 0OO and ye. there
never has been any specific statement given to the
public as to how that money was expended, what pro-
portion Of it applied to the advancement OF art,
and what to printing and otherwise, with the names
and spec c account Of the various parties And dur.
ing the last two years there has been no detailed
account published at all, showing what disposition
has been made OF the enorm ous sum Of $50 900 re-.
ceived during that period. The truth is according
to their own showing, and the disclosures made by
come Of the managers themselves they have been pro-
ceeding for some time past the credit systcm-bor.
rowing money before the sale Of tickets, and paying
interest for these loans, mu h in the same way as
the dry goods Spectators managed their business
during the years 1885, 1896 and 1887, whom they
were all smaeted and want N r;ocas n, .ro5.