The Hillsdale standard. [volume] (Hillsdale, Mich.) 1851-1909, 1876-01-11

and Ltbclous Newspapers.
Judge Cochrane, Of the Detroit Su
perior Court, in giving his decision
upon motion for a reduction Of the
bail OF James A. Scripps, of the Detroi,
Evening News. in the libel suit insti-
tvted against him by Judge Reilly,
speaks his mind in regard 10 papers oi
that character:
The question then comes down TO
this point: What is the amount OF bail
in which the defendant in this case
should be held?
have always been opposed and am
now opposed to high bail unless there
is some good reason why bail in a large
amount should be required. We can
imagine cases Of slander against parties
whom we know in this city, persons
doing a large business, men OF large
wealth, where il would be absurd to
hold the party to bail in any sum what
ever. On the other hand, there arc
persons in less fortunate positions
where it would be perfectly right and
be held to bail But the purpose of
bail, / think, generally is to FIX the
amount at such sum as will insure the
body on an execution, il the property
shall not be forthcoming. 1 think
there is some color for saying that bail
in this class Of cases is also to enable
the party to recover the debt; for there
are certain cases, il will be recollscted,
fixed in our statute, where the bail 10
required TO be in twice the amount set
forth in the affidavit Those are speci-
&c cases. Now, that would seem to
imply that the law had some other pur-
pose than merely 10 insure the body in
case Of execution; because in such case
as that il can easily be seen that there
is no discretion whatever left with the
court; and what other purpose il can
have except TO aid in the execution l
cannot imagine. am convinced that
in certain cases the purpose Of holding
to bail is to enable the plaintiff to col
lect the debt.
But, Notwithstanding my general op-
position to high bail, and the fact that
l have thought from the outset that the
bail in this case is rather high, feel
no disposition 10 belittle this case. III
the defendant has been guilty OF libel
he has been guilty of the most gross
and outrageous hbol. Thorv con be nu
question about that. 1t is case where
I think the party should be punished
and severely punished, il guilty; and
for the purpose OF this motion L must
assume that he is guilty, for the affida-
Wit makes out a prima facie case against
him. do not propose now to decide
technical defenses which may be set
up, as that OF privilege or the liberty
OF tho press, or anything OF that kind.
i must assume that while some ques-
tions may be raised, and while in n
measure, they may be considered in
the matter OF holding to bail, still, that
they are not to be decided ia favor of
the defendant, and for the purpose Of
this motion he is TO be considered as
guilty OF libel.
cannot agree with the counsel in
this case that am to look at nothing
besides the mere scrap Of paper on
which this libel was issued. 1t seems
10 me il is proper to look at the char
acter OF q paper in holding a party to
bail, precisely as it is proper to look at
the character of a man in holding TO
bail; and there are cases which seem TO
intimate that in n case of this kind you
may look ut all the surrounding cir
cumstances in ascertaining what is
the proper amount. This paper boasts
and we must assume that il 10 true,
that IL issues IL. 900 copies daily. III the
same number Of outside readers read
this paper that read papers ordinarily,
il must have from 30, 600 TO so, 900 dai-
ly readers. IL follows, then, that with.
in "a hours after the publication there
must have been that many persons who,
in all probability. saw the article.
Now a paper with this circulation has
at its command one of the most power.
full engines that can be placed in the
hands OF man; and the question is, and
n paper of this kind, having such cir
culation, should be permitted to rur
SO powerful an engine headlone
throughout the community, slaughter
/ ing regulations, wounding character
injuring feelings, by publications o.
| this kind, and then when it is called X
account screen itself behind the cry o
Liberty OF the press" and privilege.
Ii seems 10 me it ought not to be per
mitted. III this had been the only hbe
and am speaking now, perhaps out
side Of the record, but 1 think / speal
advisedly-I say. il this had been tn,
only libel which this paper had pub
lishcd, think we should look Mt itin
different light. But il is notoriou
that this paper has invaded the sancti
| A. "a .~x,..ata f.,,,ls.. .nI h.. Ir.u,a.
before the public n thousand thing
which the public do not want to know
and il has done this, 50 far rs can b
seen, not for the purpose OF instruct
ing the public, or making them better
but for the mere purpose of getting u
a reputation OF having q libelous pa
per, n spicy paper, a paper that wi
sell; in other words, il does injury 70
the purpose Of putting money into il
own pocket. i can see no other res
son for the course which this paper ha
pursued. When / say speak advised
ly of other hbels, mean that i hav
seen articles in the paper which wer
slanderous and libelous, which kno'
to have been incorrect and untrue.
will not say that the parties who pub
| Hbneu the paper put theul III hnONlu
them TO be untrue, because that is nc
for me TO say; have no knowledge i
regard 10 that. But know they wer
false, and that an action for libel woul
lie against them for the publication
Besides this, of the numerous article
affecting the reputation of various cit
zens here, it would be very strange
all were true. A newspaper gets its il
formation precisely as the rest OF Z
get our information Of facts, and is {
likely to be mistaken, and in cons
quence we may fairly assume that
this paper there is a share Of mistake
and misstatements. have no doul
that IL does make mistakes.
There is another thing which ca
not overlook in this case. IL may
said I am to lay aside ell knowledge
have in regard to this publication, b,
when / see before me the Chicas
Times with a publication in lar
headlines taken from this very pape