The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1880-12-19
NEWSPAPER COMMENTS.
Tho Privileges OF the Press.


For three days the sui. of Emma Roediger
against Oswald Ot!endorfsr, the proprietor
of the Stats Zeitung, for libel, has been oc-
cupying the attention of Judge freedman
and jury, in tho superior court, trial term.
The plaintiff claims $4,000 damages for q
libel which Mr.. Ottondorfer claims was taken
in good faith from an article published in The
Brooklyn Eagle.
After referring to the statute fixing the
particular conditions necessary to sustain a
charge of damage sustained, Judge Freed
man said the fact that the Stats Zoitung
copied its article from another newspaper
would not constitute justification. To jus.
iify the published aspersion it was
necessary to establish its truth, and
the ustifcat on must be as
FREEDOM To THE PRESS.
He then considered the defendants plea
Of privilege as follows:
"Thefreedom of the public press is guar
anteed by constitutional provisions, and
while in the exercise Of the police powers
! inherent in every state every other. business
may BIO regulated almost 10 the point of pro-
hibition, no law can be passed to restrain or
abridge the liberty of tho press. The free
dom Of the public press is thus recognized
as ono of the corner stones of our republican
institutions, and this fact has an important
bearing 10 the determination of the case of a
libel alleged TO have been published by
journal of respectable standing. In this re-
spect the footing of a newspaper in this
country differs materially from that of one
which exists only by permission from the
crown, and subject TO regulation BY the law
making power. In this country it is consid-
cred not only the right, but the duty, of
newspaper to discuss questions of public in
tsrest, and to criticize the acts of those who
may BIO temporarily intrusted with pow
er. So it is considered not only the
right, but the duty, of q newspaper to
inform its readers of the current news of
the dpy. Of course the right must be exer-
cised fairly, and duly discharged, with due
regard for truth and propristy. But as a
matter of fact, no caution that human art
can devise will totally exclude lbsls from
q newspaper. They come in hundred forms
in reports, in correspondence, in cuttings
from other papers, even in advertisements
and II the law were to be enforced in its full
severity, as it was in England, at the time
that the doctrine prevailed, the greater the
truth the greater the libel, no journal in this
country could live for month and fulfil its
mission. The case of libel appearing in
newspaper in the discharge OF its duty to tho
public may fall, therefore, within that class
of cases in which the language published
would be libellous, and subject TO the pre-
sumption Of falsehood and malice, but for
occasion upon which it was used. These
cases hold that if the language complained Of
was used in the discharge Of some public or
private duty, whether legal or moral, or re-
cognized by social custom or in the conduct
of defendants own affairs in matters whore
his interest wsl concerned in such q way that
no was called upon to speak, tho occasion
prevents the inference of malice which tho
law draws from unauthorized eommuuica-
tons, and affords q qualified Defence depend.
iuC on the absence of actual malice.
WHERE PRIVILEGE CEASES.
But this privilege IS qualified and condi-
tional, No proprietor, publisher or editor of
newspaper can use il for purposes of re-
vonEe or TO crafty personal spite, and if he
attacks an individual unnecessarily or with.
out good reason, his case is no better than if
he we're dealing with a matter wholly I'M
privileged. But the question whether he
has so abused this conditional privilege is to
be determined by the jury upon the facts of
each case. Thus 1t hSs boon held in cases
against public newspapers that an editor is
privileged in commenting fully and freely
upon all questions and matters of general
public interest; that the public conduct of
public men may BIO discussed with the great
est freedom, provided the language be kept
within the limits of an honest intention to
discharge a publictluty that when any one
consents to be q candidate for public Office,
he must be considered rs putting his charac
ter in issue, so far as respects his fitness and
qusli6c stions for the Office, and that
publications of the truth on this
subject with the honest intent of informing
the people are not libellous; that nevsps-
por may lawfully publish the fact that par
son has been arrested, and upon wins. chsrge;
and that comments in newspaper upon the
report of trial which has terminated, fairly
made, without malice, and founded on the
facts are privileged. You will therefore have
to look at all the facts which bear upon the
privilege claimed in this case, and il, upon,
the whole OF them, you should be of the
opinion that the facts published came 10 the
hands Of the defendant or his subordinates in
tho regular course Of business as items Of the
news Of the day, which had already been
published in the Brooklyn Eagle, and that
from the reputation of the latter jour-
nal and the manner of tho publcstiop therein
and all tho circumstances appearing TO sur-
round such publication, the defendant and
his subordinstes had reason to believe and
did believe the facts published to DO true,
and that the republication in the New York
Stats Zeitung was induced solely by such
belief, and that the facts thus repubished ia
the form of an extract and with express
reference to the source from which they had
been received were of such character as to
constitute, in your judgment, proper and
legitimate items Of news for publication in
tho Now York Stats Zcitung ss the most in
0uental newspaper organ Of the German
population of this city, and that the said
journal, the moment question was raised as
to tho truth Of the charge, made substanti-
ally a full and complete rstraetion Of the
whole charge, the defendant Is entitled to q
verdict, though he may have failed in the
justification on the trial.. "a