Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1893-01-18
TERRITORIAL PRESS COM
N;ESTSs
The EIlDel Law,

One of our contemporaries III its issue
of yesterday, in an editorial concerning
the libel law, falls into most egregious
error as to the condition of the law. In
referring to a statement made by the
Santa Fe New MEXICAN, it uses the fol
lowing language:
ave are prepared to admit that our val
ued contemporary at the capital is not in
any danger of being made to suffer for
libel that is libel, but under the eXtraor-
binary statute at present in force in this
territory he is in constant danger of be-
ing punished for libel that isn't libel. The
New MEXICAN has a habit OF cOndemning
what it believes to be wrong, and of bear
ing down in rather en- phatic terms, some
times, upon public or private miscreants
or evil doors, and the fact that it may
prove its charges to be true only serves to
make the danger from the present libel
law so much the greater since the truth of
the charge can not be plead under the
present law, hence it is not difficult to
imagine Estate of conditions in which
the journal might be "affected by the
libel laws or at least by such a libel law
as that which we have at present. If a
man is public corruptionist or public
plundorer, il is the duty OF any honest
journal TO expose him, and show up his
shortcomings, and yet any Journalist IN
New Mexico who does such a work lays
himself liable to fine and imprisonment
for libel under the present law, no matter
how positive and convincing may be the
proof of all the statements made"
This is the sort of stuff that the Dem
ocratic press of the territory has been
publishing about the libel law for the
last four years. The writers of such
statements have either never read the law
or are wilful liars. They are also either
densely ignorant of the general law on
the sub iect or they believe their readers
to be so and therefore easily imposed
upon.
At the common law the rule was that
the defendant in an Indictment for libel
could not justify himself by proving the
truth of the matter charged to be libel
lous. In 1876 by express statute the
common law was put in force in the ter
ritory of New Mexico. Libel is com
mon law offense, and up to 1889 was pun
ishable in the courts of this territory in
accordance with the rules of the common
law, and in any prosecution the defend
ant would not have been allowed to prove
the truth of his statements. This being
the condition of the law, in 1889 statute
was passed which mitigates the severity
of the common law, and has excited the
hostility of the Democrats of New Mex
leo. Bearing in mind that under the law
as it stood up to that time the truth of o
statement could not be shown in his de-
tense by defendant IN a criminal pros
ecution for libel, we call the attention OF
our readers to the following quotations
from the act of 1889:
SEC. IA. 1t is no offense to make
true statements of fact, CT express opin
ions as to the qualifications of candi
date for any office or public place, or ap
pointment."
Sec. Is. 1t is no offense to publish
true statements of fact rs to the ualiiica
tions of any person for any occupation
profession or trade"
Sec. 49, 1t is no libel TO publish an,
statement respecting any Legislative o.
judicial proceeding, whether the state
ment be in fact true or not, unless in sucl
statement charge Of corruption is made
against some person acting In Legislative
or judicial capacity"
Sec %. In the following cases, til,
truth Of any statement charged as libe
may be shown in justification of the de
fendant:
/. Where the publication purports t.
be an investigation of the official con