The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1876-03-17
DIR I,lREI. LAWS.

At the last meeting of our State Editorial
Associations, a Committe was appointed to
draft bill to amend the existing law on this
subject, and present 1t to the Legislature
The Committee has never met, and we pre-
sumo that II is too late TO accomplish any
thing this session.
Although believing in the freedom Of the
press" as guaranteed by our fundamental
laws, we do not believe in indscriminate
license. But it is not true that the press is
untrammeledi in all matters proper for public
information, and we are surprised that the
Patriot, and other equally well informed
journals should take such ground.
The Constitution of 1878 says:-
SEC. z. The printing press shall be free to
every person who may undertake to examine
the proceedings of the Legislature or any
branch of government, and no law shall
ever be made to restrain the rights thereof.
The free communication of thoughts and
opinions is one of the invaluable rights of
man and every citizen may freely speak,
write and print on any subject, being re-
sponsible for the abuse Of that liberty. No
conviction shall be had in any prosecution
for the publication of papers relating to the
official conduct of officers or men in public
capacity, or to any other matter proper for
public investigation or information, where
the fact that such publication was not
maliciously or negligently made shall be
established to the satisfaction of the jury
and in all indictments for libels the jury
shal! have the right to determine the law
and the facts under the direction of the
court as in other cases.
This section applies to criminal prosecu-
tions, but does not change the law of evil
dence as to civil suits. In other words, one
class of evidence is admissible in one form
of action that is not in another. Not only
that, but by existing laws Tor rulings) in a
civil suit for libel, presumptions are formed
and evidence excluded that is not the fact in
other civil suits.
The severity of our common law, which
we inherited, is matter of history. Theft,
and witch craft, were punishable by death.
Under the Roman law, libel was punishable
by DEATH But prosecutions for libel under
the common law were extremely rare. In
fact previous to Edward III. no case is re-
ported, and only one during his reign. The
existing law was instituted by the Star
Chamber of Charles lst., but was expunged
from English Courts by 6 and 7 Victoria,
and the reform has been adopted in most of
the States.
1t may be true that the accepted common
law laid down by Sir Edward Coke and con-
firmed by Lord Mansfield that "the greater
the truth the greater the libel' no longer is
maintained ia this State, and that Since the
decision of Lord Chancellor Erskine in the
case of DR.. Shipley the jury are not con-
fined to the mere fact of publication, but are
also judges of the law. The statute of 32
George III. settled this question.
The act of 1S43 Is and Victoria before
mentioned, provided in substance that the
published for the public benefit, and that the
defendant might plead in defence that the
alleged libel was published without actual
malice and without gross negligence, and
that before the commencement Of the action or
at the earliest opportunity afterwards, the de-
tenddnt inserted an apology.
We therefore insist that in all cases of libel
criminal or civil the jury are entitled to
have all the facts bearing upon the case, and
make up their verdict accordingly.
In conclusion weq quote the following from
Jeremy Bentham, one Of England's most
distinguished writers, as peculiarly applica-
BILE to this question: at cannot be denied
that men are apt, both as judges and jurors,
when coolly deciding in court of justice,
to take offence at expressions, which, as ord-
nary readers, they never would have blamed.
The judge comments upon the violent words
which he has no right to do, seeing that it is
the sole business Of the jury to decide
the publication complained of is or
is not a libel and the jury, recollecting the
oath they are under, bewildered by the
vagueness of the law, are not permitted to
seek for all the light which might be de-
rived from investigating the truth or false
hood of the matter before them"