The morning call., 1890-05-24
THE COST OF LIBEL.

The moral of the verdict in the Garness
case is that he who undertakes to libel his
ueighbOr carries his life in his hand. And
II Is not necessary, to constitute the libel,
that lie should accuse his neighbor of
crimes for which he could be indicted and
imprisoned. The otfense is complete if he
says or writes of him things which tend to
cover him with disgrace, which wound his
family, and lower the estimation in which
lie is held by the community. For such
wrongs an appeal to the courts is often
slow and uncertain recent verdicts in the
Garness and other cases demonstrate that
iuries will sanction a swifter form of re-
dress.
1t is to be regretted that the regular
forms of law are not considered adequate
10 deal with all wrongs. Ii argues a laxity
in its administration when men are justi-
fed by juries in taking the law into their
own hands. But we must take things as
we find them, and we certainly find in this
community settled principle that the
blackmailer aud the libeTtine are outside
the protection of the law when their victim
avenges himself by violence Ever since
leading newspaper proprietor in this city
was shot down in his own Office by one
whose family he had slandered, and jury
decided that it was justifable, it has been
an unwritten law in San Francisco that the
libeler took his chances of living or dying
at the discretion Of the party he had
wronged.
There is a rough sort of justice in this.
The man who is bounded TO death by foul
mouthed wretch has really, under our ad-
ministration Of law, very scanty redress.
He may institute suit for libel or defama-
ton which may drag for years; when it
comes up in court he has the pleasure of
seeing all the sore spots in his past life
probed by brutal attorney; and, at the
last, he is lucky if fixed" jury do not
pack him out Of court with no satisfaction
and heavy bill OF costs to pay. Such a
prospect is poor consolation for one who is
smarting under the goad of defamatory
articles which merely prove the maleyo-
Ience or the cupidity of their writer, cover
him with odium and ridcule and fill the
hearts of his friends with anguish. The
temptation in such case to strike back
with the first available weapon is strong ;
and though, as matter of abstract law, no
one can be excused for taking his defense
into his own hands, so long as the courts
are open for his protection, yet it is easy to
see how juries reconcile it TO their con-
oC4CHCco W Of6IlOOk the wrong
view of the tangible injury.
There is another point of view in which
appeals to the higher law can be under stood,
If they cannot be justified as a rule of life.
Whenever it is generally realized that the
false libeler may be shot with impunity,
false libels will cease. The vocation of
the libeler will be gone. 1t will not pay.
1t has been observed as palliating excuse
for the institution of duelling, that in ccun-
tries where it prevails men are more careful
of their behavior, more considerate in their
language and more respectful to the sex
than in countries which have eschewed it
with other relics of the dark ages. So,
whenever it is understood that juries will
acquit the assailant of a writer who uses
his position to ruin private individuals,
from pure malice or blackmail, the list of
such writer's will be very brief indeed.