Weekly Trinity journal., 1877-06-09
LIBEL SUITS.

Senator Sargent laid c4,mplaint be
fore the Grand Jury of San joaquin
county charging the DeYoungs, of the
San Francisco Chronicle with libel, the
libel being contained in an editorial re-
fecting on his character based upon the
revelations" of the defaulter Pinney.
Congressman Page makes similar com.
plaint before the Grand Jury of El Dora
do county. In the hearing at Stockton
the DeYoungs were present and the
Grand Jury, by vote of 10 To 9 ignored
the bill, but we believe that in K Dorado
county bill was found.
If this were all there would be little or
no need of remark, but it appears from
Mr.. Sargent's letter, ITO the Public"
that it is his intention TO prosecute the
DeYoungs in every county in the State.
That in every county in which the Chro'l,
tcte circulates the crime of libel has been
committed and the Grand Jury of that
county Gf one be called) asked 20 find
true bill against the Chronicle proprie-
tors. We do not think Mr.. Sargent wise
in this procedure. 1t is true, that the ar
ticles of which he complains are dcfnma
tory and libellous in the highest degree,
and we cannot blame him that he seeks
the Mid Of the law t. redress the injury.
punish the guilty parties and establish the
fasehood OF the accusations. Nor do we
question his uBdoubtrd right to select any
county in which he has been maligned,
To have his accuser brought to trial. But
if proceedings are instituted in three,
four, or dozen counties, IL will have the
appearance more Of persecution. and will
put the defendants % ruin0us costs to de-
fend themselves. We do not indorse he
Chronicles course by any means-ihere
is too much Of disposition on the part
Of people ~ villify and abuse men whose
talents raise them above the misses, and
such abuse, whether deserved or not, is
greedly drank in by certain class. We
have the highest faith in Senator Sar-
gents private and public integrity, yet
we think that the proposed mode of vim
dcation is not the one he should adopt.
And it cannot escape the Senator's obser-
vation that the course he has outlined
would, even were the defendants
innocent and perfectly able to establish
the truth of all they have charged, put
them t0 an enormous expense to prove
themselves so. Whereas, the prosccu
ton, being conducted by and on behalf
of the people, costs the accusers compar
atively nothing.
The press has its mission and one part
Of this is to keep the people posted in all
affairs. The acts of men in public life
are subject for just criticism, always
surprising this criticism deals with real.
and not imaginary acts. In the present
case, it remains u be shown how much
is true, how much false Ofthe Chronicles
statements. Justice will be satisfied if
Tie utlcHuullts uTe lHulCleu, liltu anu
convicted if gdilty, in the county in
which they reside. Or, if the accusers
believe that justice cannot be obtained in
that county, let the trial take place in
some other. So much for justice and
vindication. Mr.. Sargent declines to in
stitute civil proceedings for the reason
that he does not value his character by
dollars and cents. In this he is right. no
man of character cares TO institute such
an action for the pecuniarv benefits he
may realize by it. The primary objects
of the aggrieved party, is to punish the
criminal and prove the fnlsity of his as
sertions. The course outlined in Mr..
Sargent's letter is. in our opinion very
injGdicious one, for one criminal suit
commenced in place where witnesses
and counsel are easily accessible, will go
farther in vindication than dozen or
score Of suits carried on where ali the nd
vantages are on ihe side of the accuser.