The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1892-04-27

somewhat Orangeish history of the re-
lgious discussions, and the reader will
readily see why any little accident in his
newspaper career affords much interest
to friends and opponents alike. His re.
cent arrest was just bad enough to be
funny.
There is politician in New York who
married a sister of the noted Victoria
Woodruff and Tennie Clahin and is
otherwise locally celebrated. Of him
The Post recently spoke as an 'Fex-keepe1
of a dive" He straightway employed a
lawyer who had various reasons for not
loving Mr.. Godkin, and the next Sunday
morning the latter was aroused from q
sound sleep by an officer with a warrant
| for his arrest on information for crimi.
nal libel. But he did not go behind bars.
Friends gathered rapidly, bail was
given, and so Larry" as jocular rivals
call him, got away from court in time to
attend church. This incident has once
more started the discussion as to libel
laws, and they are found to be in even
worse confusion than ever.
In similar case a friend once con-
doled with the late George Jones, of the
New York Times, who replied: ooh, is
that all? Why there are only six suits
now pending against The Times. This
is bad year Tor 'em. I've been in the
newspaper business thirty-five years and
have always had from four to sixteen
libel suits on hand and have never yet
paid one cent damages" Mr.. Matthews,
of the Buffalo Express, gave similar
testimony. Out of dozen heavy suits
but one went against him, and In that
case the verdict was for S., 900.
Other papers have not been so for.
tunate. The New York Herald paid a
Mr.. Malloy, of South Carolina. 500 COO
merely for making this little statement:
1.-The leading citizens of Edgetield think
that one Malloy, white man who some
time ago was suspected of burning his
own store for the purpose of obtaining
the insurance, kindled the fire which re-
suited so disastrously." This is the case
in which Judge William James Wallace,
of the United States circuit court, made
the remarkable decision that The Her
aid had told SO big and palpable lie
that it did no harm!
This is not burlesque. Here is the
exact language of the judge: '"The orig
inal publication, although its sensational
character and fragrant mendacity were
well calculated to outrage the feelings
Of the plaintiff, was so destitute of a
color Of truth that it could not seriously
injure him in the estimation of the i'm
mediate community in which he lived"
To a good many persons this sounded
like polite way of saying that The Her
aid Tor its correspondent was such a
liar that its word could injure no one.
And strangely enough. some people have
an idea that this is law. But it isn't. |
No man can take advantage of his own |
wrong, and the biggest liar in the COM |
munity is as responsible for his words |
as a George Washington. There's lots |
of fun in libel suit-for all except the |
parties-and by a curious but not well
understood law they seem to run in
groups. About five years ago an article
appeared in the New York Mail and Ex-
press with these scare heads:
SHE MARRIED NEGRO.
A charming and intelligent young woman
weds an illiterate black man!
The date was at a New jersey town,
the names were given in full and the
local correspondent was known to be re-
liable. A savage letter soon arrived
from an indignant father, then notice
of libel suit and next retraction and
very humble apology. A letter to the
correspondent notified him that if he
ever entered the Mail and Express Office
he would encounter an ablebodied
lanitor with fair sized club. Scarcely