New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-04-11
TIE SAXTON LIBEL BILL DEFEATED.
Mr.. ACKER ENERGIES FROM oBsCUMTY no LEAD
rnE ATrAcK On TnE MEAsURE.

Albany ArrI lO-Nr Saxton's bill 70 protect
newspapers f,1n speculative libel suits received rough
treatment at the hands Of the Assembly to-day, being
defeated by a vote Of y TO 81. The vote may be con
sldcrrd measure Of the resentment felt by rural
members Of the Legislature at the reycrent tono
adopted by city newspapers especially those Of New
York CITY, IN speaking q their votes upon the I'm
unrant measures that are constantly under Oonsidcra
tlun By the Legislature Even In rural districts
also tho Assembly ceiling scandal has this year pro-
vokcd Irritating criticisms from newspapers upon tho
course OF members Ct the Legislature which might
lead common folk to think less highly OF them. Mr.
Acker Of stcuben County, who led tho attack upon the
b has thu. far IN his legislative OF two years
not attracted the slightest attention, favorable or
lu4av0rablo, in the newspapers. lie simply
was one Of the many Assemblymsn whose actions and
speeches are not considered worthy OF notice. The
newspaper cores ondcnts were amazed to see him
rise and assaII the bill with as II It was
matter Of life and death to him that It should be
killed Mr.. Acker, perhaps, gave an explanation OF
his course when I'm previous conversation with
fellow Asscmbyman, I'm urging him to vote against
the bill. be said
These papers will charge you in big head
lines with being a striker because You vote for
drcsacdbc"f bill, and then If you demand an cNplana-
tlon. they will print an apology two days later In
small type I'm out OF The way corner OF thcr news
paper. That Is not fair"
But Mr. Ackrr's attack upon the bill was 50 sudden
and so unexpe, 81 that its friends wcgc unable TO
save # from defeat. when the bill was announced,
Mr. Acker, pretending ignorance OF IT, asked Mr..
sayton for an explanation Of its features. Mr..
saNton thcrcnpon made able and convincing speech
I'm favor Of the bill. II' said, among other things
certainly do not think the present h"l law prevents
NEWSPAPERS gathering all the truthful facts. But do
think the present libci Is unfair aud unjust In this
that 70 presume, that the newspaper which publishes an
article that may be untrue published that article wIuHy
and mallcou-y This El only Affects TIE law Of libel
r, far az punitive exemplary damages are concerned
l do not believe myself, Nh Speaker, IN pun,'iy" or
exemplary damages in any cvl action, and IL utter
great controversy IN Court of Appeals that tn" prIn
chile wa, incorporated In the law Of this state and II
wa with dyldcd and with very strong opinions
against II.
Now In an ordinary action for tort such aS assault and
battery u course DE presumption Of malice
because when another be Is presumed 10
understand contemplate the consequence Of that act
which proceeds directly from his will But when IL comes
to publication Of article in great newspaper, whore
IL is impossible supervise personally all the news that
comes pouring all parts Of the world, that II DIFF
trrcnt thing Then It is not question OF malice or
diuarly II ought be question Of presumptiye
malice I -ay that ordinarily the bes printed in news
papers are merely negligence and arc not wul or
malicious