The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-06-22

sentiments as expressed in the Senate OF
the United States in reply to Mr.. Thurman
of Ohio
No ono believes that, with possibly avery
lew exceptions, any newspaper in the
country would willfully or knowingly pub
lish libel in reference to n public man or
any other person. 1t is very easy, how
ever, to predicate suit for libel, cause the
arrest of an editor or publisher of news
paper, and subject him to very great ex-
pense even If there is no foundation in
fact for such a suit and an honorable ac
quittal is assured on trial. The liberty of
the press and of speech is guaranteed by
Our organic law, but it is very easy to place
muzzlc on the press, without seeming TO
do so and without a palpablc violation of
the constitution. In the case of Jayne and
Sanborn, the statements of the press if
false were libcls if true they were not
libcls, but upon cXparte evidencc-and that
is all grand jury listens to-indctments
might have been easily obtained. But
under the law, the conductor of the news
paper must he indicted ant tried at home,
where the expense would he trlling and he
coulj. therefore, knowing he was right,
afford to snap his fingers at them and keep
on exposing fraud, corruption and rot
tcncss. But how would it he if he could
he forced 10 Washington or San Francisco
for trial? Yet this is precisely what the
two Senators from Vermont cndcavored to
do. This is what a majority of the United
States Senate. present at Mondays session,
cndcavorcd TO do. We will explain the
matter as briefly as possible; first recalling
the attention of our readers to tic charges
which were made, last summer, against
| Senator from Wisconsin, and which he has
never confronted in the manner which his
constituents demanded of him. 1t is
necessary to bear this in mind as apparently
! aifordng the original motive Tor this
attempt TO strangle free discussion, for this
attack on the liberty of the pre- $.
One week ago to-day, Senator Carpenter
of Wisconsin, "obtained the floor" and re-
qncstcd the Senate to dispose of certain
bills under his care, stating that, ION ac-
count Of his occupancy Of the chair all
the session. he had been unable to
attend to them sooner. His request was
| granted, and after dispOsing of several
matters, he reported another bill giving to
the United States courts, in certain cases,
''Co"ni2ancc OF all civil suits where the
amount involved exceeds five hundred dol
| lars the eleventh section providing, in
substance, that in all actions not involving
the title Of real estate process may he
! served upon any person or corporation do
ing business in any judicial district, having
| there an agent I'm respect of The matter
out of which the case arises Ivy delivery of
Il copy 10 such agent. a motion was made
to strike out the section, but it was mega
lived. An amendment was then proposed
to except all actions for libel and Islander
from the operation Of the act but it was
ncgatived and the bill passed. George i.
| Edmunds and Justin $. Morrill,, Senators
in Congress from Vermont, voted against
the motion TO strike out the eleventh sec
ton, against the motion to except suits for
SANDER and libel, dgdinSt a motion 10 re-
consider the vote not to except such ac-
tions, and IN ftcOr of the passage of the
bill. What does it mean? 1t means
that the editor or publisher of Vermont
newspaper, for criticislng the acts of u
public man, can be dragged to Washington,
81. Louis. Milwaukee, New Orleans, San
| Francisco or any where else where n core
spondcnt may he located on trumped up
charge of libel. 1t means that the press
must not comment on the public acts of
public men, and must remain quiet if, per
chance, they know public men have been
bribed. 1t was aimed at the liberty of the
press, it was an attempt to suppress free
this and affects every man or company in
the country doing a large wholesale bust
ness-lile our marble, slate and scale com
panics. Let Senator Wadlcigh, a republic
would says the Senator from New IIamp-
shire, " make it unsafe for a man in any
" kind Of business to employ an agent
Z" Suppose a man in San Francisco or Texas
" should desire TO sue a merchant in New
" York and should begin a suit in the
" United States circuit court of either of
. those remote states, all that would be
" necessary in order to force the New
" Yorker to go thousand of miles from
" home To defend himself. would be to
" catch some travelling salesman Of the lat
" ter, and serve The process on him." Are
we not right in saying that the convention
and the press would have been pleased to
have The Scnator cXplain his vote?