Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1891-04-16
a RESTRAINT UPON FREE SPEECH.

a RESTRAINT UPON FREE SPEECH.
The Importance of the real meaning
of the anti-lotIerv law enacted by the
last congress is not understood by the
general public. Probably few of the
congressman who voted for it saw how
far-reaching the effects Of such law
would become. Still fewer cOntem-
plated the arming of minor govern
mental functionaries with the tremen
dous power that this law has put into
the hands of postal appointees OF the
party in power, and which already in
some cases has been used with very
indiscreet zeal.
In order to make a test case the
manage. of the Mobile Register detied
the law, published the advertisement
of lottery and sent the paper contain
ing the obnoxious matter through the
mail. He was arrested and has APP
pealed against the constitutionality OF
the law.
In his brief before the supreme court
covering the case, the Registers coun
sci, Hon. Hannis Taylor discusses the
constitutionality OF the law from law
yer's view, and in technical language.
but the argument is lighted up with
many CLEANS OF common sense that
make it worth the reading and reflec-
ton OF every American citizen.
The proposition, shorn of all legal
phraseology and amplitication, is that
the law is unconstitutional because i
declare certain printed matter to be
immoral, affixing penalty for the
sending through the mails of papers
containing it, and denies the right Of
trial by jury to determine whether the
matter is really immoral or not. Con
gress has usurped a purely judicial
function in attempting to adjudicate
the fact that publications touching
lotteries are criminal libels."
But this is for the lawyers to argue
and the courts to determine. Back of
the lawyers, the courts and congress
are the people, and it is worth their
while to think of the possible applica-
ton of the anti-lottery law to other
supposed offenses against public morals
if that law is allowed TO stand. 1t
creates q power unknown to English
and American law since the failure OF
the licensing act in England 200 years
ago-the power to restrict the freedom
OF the press and TO say what shall OF
shall not be published. That is what
it amounts TO, for, while the law goes
no further than to exclude papers con-
tanning such matter from the mails,
its effect is TO exclude the prohibited
matter from the papers themselves.
since an essential to d newspapers life
is its transmission and delivery through
the postotfices. 1t is not q question
limited 10 the Louisiana lottery, which
is the great evil at which the law
struck: but the question is, if congress
has the power to declare that the pub
location of an article touching the Lou
isiana lottery is immoral, has it not the
power to say that any other publication
is or is not immoral? And when once
such an authority is conceded to
where will it carry us
to? We may soon have laws that
put ban on newspapers that adver-
tise or comment upon saloons, if the
Prohibitionists shall get in power If
the Alliance should control congress
the newspapers might be cast out OF
the postotfices and their proprietors ar
rested and punished for hostile criti-
cism of the sub-treasury scheme. a
congress possessing a cen
sorship OF the press could regulate
Democratic criticism by enacting law
barring all lowtariff editorials as i'm
moral literature not TO be transmitted
the mails. It viii not do TO
say that this is ridiculous. and that
will never do such a thing
Probably not. But the bes. way 10