Arizona weekly citizen., 1892-12-31

dom can De cured, ana the most lnnO- cent may, in a moment, be deprived of his good name, upon which, perhaps, he depends for the prosperity and all the happiness of hIs life."
 Upon being called to plead to the In- dictment you both stated your plea to be that you were not guilty of the charge. WhereupOn day agreeable to YOU and to the Territory was set for the trial of the issue thus joined, upon which day a jury was duly empanelled and sworn to try the cause. This jury was one of your own choosing, inasmuch as 1t was accepted by you before the ex- haustion, either of the grand panel or of your peremptory challenges. And let, me add that this jury from every standpoint that this court is able to judge was com posed of honest and conscientious men, desirous of doing their duty. The prosecutors proved the fact of the
 publication of the article charged to be hbellous ID the Arizona Enterprise, and 4 that this newspaper is published by you, and in addition proved the subeequents s publication of other similar articles in 4 | the same newspaper and rested its case. | You, then. without the introduction of | any testimony, went to the jury upon the { 1 case as thus made out by the Territory.
 In my deliberate judgment, this was | tantsmOunt to a plea of guilty; at least | it could leave no doubt in the minds of
 an honest and intelligent jury that you 1 were guilty as charged. Why do l say sc? For these reasons:
 Ist. There could be no doubt ofsths l fact of the publication by you. 2nd. For the reason before stated, .oT. l witness wIUh the perpetration of crime involving moral turpitude, and was pre-
 sumptively injurious to his reputation
 for honesty and integrity, and hence libellOus under the statute.
 3rd. It being an injurious publication,
 under the statute it was presumed to be
 malicious. in the absence of any show ing of ju5tiflable motive for making 1t. Not only so, but there was in addition affirmative proof of actual malice. It was shown that other articles were publish ed attacking the presenting witness, | tending to impeach his honesty and in tegrity and to expose him to pubic hatred and contempt. These articles
 plainly indicated feelings of animosIty and i'll will against the prosecuting wit
 ness, entertained by you at the time
 of the publication of the article com
 plained of, and illustrated the motives
 which actuated its publication. These
 facts were all that was needed to make
 out a case of libel under our statutes,
 and there being no denial of them such
 silence amounted to a confession of all 7 that these facts would imply, and that
 as a confession of guilt.
 b The law does not put upon person 3 hbelled the absurd aud illogical burden P of proving the falsity of the accusation. } 1 Every man is presumed to be honest un- s til he has been shown (not charged) to
 be dishonest. He is presumed to be of r good character until some evidence to 8 the contrary be produced. He is also , | to be presumed under the criminal laT ,, to be innocent of crime until he has been y proven to be guilty beyond any reasona- 8 bic doubt, and cer ainly be will b9 pre-
 sumed to be innocent of crime, even } when accused in the public prints, until ] his guilt be established by clear and - satisfactory proof.
 The accusation against the prosecut- 8 Ing witness made by you in the article J complained of was presumably false and }, needed no denial at his hands. While [ thls Is true, the law permitted you to
 show that the accusation was true and
 was made with good motives and for 9 justifiable ends. Not only SO, but it 7 l provided that upon your having made 7 | such proof you should be entitled to a 8 complete vindicatiOn and acquittal at T the hands of the court and jury. This | you dId not seek to do, nor ask to do; s neither dId you go upon the stand your s selves to rebut the presumption of ], l malice, nor to prove the truth of the 3 | charge against the prosecuting witness, 3 nor did you Cffef any witness to testify 3 to these things. If this charge against 8 Brewster Cameron was true, you not f only owed 1t to yourselves to have proven 9 1t, but you owed 0 solemn obligation to ] this court to have made 1t manifest. l. You owed 1t to the community to show 2 that man occupying so responsible a 9 position as that of clerk of thIs court ? 1 was unworthy to hold it. The lbsllOus , article apprised the community that the ] | proof of its truth was available and T within your reach, and that such proof [ would be forthcoming when the oppor- E tunity and occasion should arrive; in [ addition the law afforded you abundant ] means to obtain the necessary evidence. 3 | Dispositions of absent and distant wit , nesses could have heen taken and the ? whole matter thoroughly sifted, and the } truth arrived at. If this accusation was } not true, then you had no legal or moral right to have publicly charged it. , There is, therefore, nothing to show a legal excuse for the publication of the
 article complained of, charging the com , mission of crime by the prosecuting
 witness; nor. if the accusation was , true, any moral excuse for your failure
 or refusal to make this proof appear.
 am, therefore, of opinion that the
 verdic. was a Iu,t t one, which any honest jury would have found.
 I will therefore ask you If you have
 any legal cause to show why judgment s1Ould not be pronounced at this time? To which defendants replied that they
 had none.
 In fixing the punishment which
 ought to be given in this case I am
 mindful that the jury recommended you 10 the mercy of the court. l am
 also mindful Of that princ'p p'e of crimin
 al Jurisprudence, which declares that the object and end of 'he law in its punitive function, is to vindicate itself
 that CtleTs may bs d. tered b. it's wRrn- iDgs from the commission of like Ofen-
 ces, The maximum penalty prescribed by the state IS incarceration in the
 Territorial prison for the term of ore year. Nile l feel that you have been guilty Of grave offence. meriti1g seri- Ous punishment, l have concluded that
 a short term of imprisonment would
 perhaps serve as an example tO others and a Usef-l lesson to yourselves, and
 that the law would be by this course
 sufficiently vindICa;ed.
 | l therefore sentence you, George W. | Brown, and you, R. C. Brown, to serve |