Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1876-02-02
uUxxLING THE CALIFORNIA
PRESS.

successor upon the Journal he repre-
sented from occupying q seat within
the sacred precincts Of the senatorial
forum, an amendment to the code was
passed in the Senate making libel q
felony and punishable by imprison-
ment in the State Prison. This would
work no particular hardship upon re-
specialize journalists, as anything Of
. libelous character should never, and
seldom does, find its way into the col
umns Of a respectable newspaper; con-
sequently this amendment in itself
did not amount to much; but when it
was followed up by the repeal Of the
act obliging persons commencing suits
for libel to give security for the de-
PENDANTS costs in case the prosecutor
failed to make out . case it looked rs
though there was . determination
upon the part of the Senate to place
the newspaper publishers Of the State
At the mercy Of every irresponsible
loaSer who might choose to put them
to the expense of defending innumer-
able suits embracing M other u
Of action than malice Of the prose-
cutting witness. Unjust, however, a.
these measures might seem, it was re-
served fer Senator P~ierson, Of San
Francisco, to cap the climax by the
introduction Of . bill which, in the
language Of the San Francisco Post,
twas conceived in ignorance Of the
fundamental law, of the character Of
the people and the country for which
it Is intended, and without precedent
in any Anglo-Saxon community"
The main feature OF the bill
alluded to is . provision which
requiresthat all original articles or cor
respondence printed in any newspaper
or serial publication published in Cali
fornia, shall be published ia such
newspaper or serial with the full name
Of the author of such article or corre-
spondence. Snch q law exists in
France and Is the means whereby the
press il kept in trammels; for in France
Journalism 10 under the control Of the
Government; but q precedent for such
IN arbitrary law can not be found in
the history of American legislation;
not oven during the troublous times OF
the rebellion, when the freedom Of the
press was necessarily restricted to
closer limits than at any other time in
the nations history. But aside from
all other considerations, such a law
could work to no good end. It might,
and probably would, drive the best and
,boldest writer's Of California to other
States where no such foolish law ex-
lists, and it might cause in a great
measure the publication of anony-
NOUS pamphlets; but the public good
would not be any better promoted by
such pamphlets than it is now by the
public journals. The Tost of the 18th
nit. contains an able article upon the
subject, and after reviewing the mat
ter in it, political aspect gives the fol
lowing moral and constitutional rea'
sons against the proposed legislation
The first is, that personal journalism
ID contrary to the fixed custom, and IL
the moral and intellectual constitution
OF the American people. With us 1t is
the journal, not the individual, tina
speaks; public opinion. not the man
That man may be a person altogether
Insignificant, and even unpopular and
hateful 70 the general reader; but Il
the thing he writes be important and
true. the people will and should coun.
tenance it and give it due considera.
ton. II it be false, the falsehood must
soon be detected, and the journal will
then be the sufferer in loss OF reputa-
ton and patronage. II the writer oil
every article thar Justly scOres = public
deltnuaent were knowHat the moment
OF reading II, the Criminal Court would
b. overrun with cases OF assault, ~
ssult to kill, granddaughter, murder
and affairs Of honor. This Is the ex'
perieuce In France, from whence the
principle OF the bill Is imported.
Every Journalist unable OF unwilling
60 defend himself would be put to the
cost OF employing DULLES TO do bis
fighting, aud every publishing house
would be turned into an armory. BY
oil means, II this bill Is N pass, let an
act repeating the law against duelin9
GO with it. There Is no Law against
dueling In France.
The other insuperabls difficulty in
the way IL that the bill II unconstitu-
tional, ami would be q dead law from
the beginning-a poor and silly monu-
ment OF malice against the newspapers.
The ninth section Of the first article Of
our constitution reads: Every citi-
xens may freely speak, write and pub
iish his sentiments, on all subjects, be-
ing responsible for the abuse OF that
right, and no law shall be passed to
restrain orabridge the liberty Of spesSh
for the abuse Of that right" By civil
aotion for damages in libel, or by GRIM
inal prosecution for libel. The law
knows no other remedy for the wrongs
by the press than these two, and the
Constitution restricts legislation to