Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1891-07-05
That Sunday sun Injunction

/ Special to the Gazette
The GAZETTR'S readers will remember
! that an injunction was granted here re
Straining the circulation of the Kansas City
Sunday sun OF various issues. The Suns
people have employed Dickson Il MOroney,
4 law firm OF this city. TO test the validity
| Of these injunctions, and the following has
been filed:
In district court of Dallas county, state
of Texas The state of Texas by D. y.
Williams, county attorney, Dallas county,
Texas, ". !. 7. kerrigan et al
Now come defendants in said cause and
respectfully move the court 10 dissolve the
injunction heretofore granted herein. re-
Straiuing the publication and circulation of
the Kansas City Sunday Sun, dated June
Il, 1891, for the following reasons, to-wit:
l. Because said proceeding by the state
is without lawful authority, and the stat
ute upon which it IS based 5 unconstitu-
tiOnal and void.
>. Because under the American system of
constitutional government, Us defined in the
bill! of rights of the constitution of Texas
and the amendments TO the United States
constitution, there can be no censorship OF
the press in form, name or substance; and
no constitutional power exists in any public
officer or set OF public officers to determine
Ill advance what newspapers shall or shall
not be published; and no constitutional
power exists or can exist under our system
of government to enjOln or otherwise pro-
hibit the circulation of any public newspa-
per AT the command of any public officer
Stunning To act as censor OF the public press
but all persons guilty of any abuse of the
liberty OF the press are responsible after
the fact alone, and on verdict Of a jury
after fair constitutional trial.
>. Because all persons charged with
violation OF the penal law are entitled 10 u
trial by jury, they shall not be twice put in
~ 81 - noe 70
authorize injunctions in the aid of the penal
laws and to authorize a court sitting with
out a Jury to determine whether or not de
PENDANT is guilty of crime, and to punish
such crime under color OF proceeding for
contempt, is in violation of the bill of rights,
and void.
!. Because the sup preston of the entire
issue of public new p aper, after the same
has been printed, on An eX-parte hearing,
without notice, trial or evidence. and in ad-
dition. the consequent destruction OF val
liable rights of contract involved IN the free
circulation Of every newspaper, and all
without bond or 4 legally responsible plain
tiff, and in such a manner that defendants
can have no pecuniary indemnity or compen-
sation, is TO deprive defendants of their
property without due process OF law, and
10 deny 10 defendants the equal protection
OF the laws, and is an express Violation OF
both the constitution of the United States
and OF the constitution OF the state OF
Texas.
;. Because it appears that the burden of
plaintiffs complaint is in the main news
paper criticism of public officers. charging
them with oppression. unfairness and other
misconduct in office, and the truth OF such
charges Is not denied in plaintiffs petition,
and II such charges are true, they are in the
highest degree matters proper for public
information, and if untrue, the investiga-
ton OF their truth should not and cannot
lawfully be suppressed on the eX-parte COM
plant Of the officers resting under such
charges.
Il. Because said petition is in every re-
spect vague, indefinite and uncertain and
presents no ground for any relief, legal or
equitable.