Albuquerque weekly citizen. (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1891-19??, 1893-01-21
rus L,asL law .


referring 90 n etatcmeu, made hy tho
Santa Pc New Mexican, II usca the fol.
lowing language:
We are prepared a. admit thR, our val
ued contemporary ut the capital !" not in
any danger 10 b.ing mad" tu sul'"r lot
libel that IN libel, tut under the "Ntrhur
binary statute ut present ~ force ~ ihi-
tarr,tory he N IN constant danger ~
ba,ng punished Tor libel that lsnt librl.
The New Mexican has habit ~ t't
dsmning what II lr'levra u y" wrong
and ~ bearing down IA rather "mphH'i'
terms, aometimee, upon rHbl' 't liI'"
miscreants OF evil du"ts, hhl w." i''
that IL may prove its charges iu 10" va"
only seryes 10 make The danger tf1W 'h"
present libsl law ~ much 'h" sI'"'''
since the truth ~ the charge cannot H"
plead under the preeent Law, hence u ,r
not difficult to imag nr state ~ cut.
dtinns" IN which the Journal might ID"
"aiy.cted by the ltb-I lHN-,' ur ~ i"hai
10y such n lOel lAW ~ ilNi WHICH, ~
have at present. II u mnu Boz hrHhu.
curruptiuuiHt ur u puhUr p,ttd"f"r, IL .H
the duty ~ any huur-t journal 20 "NUu-"
him, and SHOW up hiH shortcomings, 49, J
yet any journalist ~ Ne" MrNro ST."
doas such n work lays himself llhh +" 90
fine and imprisonment f"r libel und"t
the present Law, no matter hn" p'rlbNr
and convincing may De- tne proof ~ AL
the statements madN
This II the sort ~ rtuN THAT TIE i"u'
cratic press % the t"friut! has ur"n
publishing about the iiu", las f't tN"
last four years. The winters 81 such
statements have either uryrr read q "
Law or are w,ltul liars They a." ai-'
either densely ignorant - IT," general
Law on the subject - they h"urEr th"r
readers 10 be- ~ aui therefore onsJ.y lm
posed upon.
At the cummuu law the raj" NaH that
the defendant IA al Indictment Tor Ii"i
could not justify himself b. proving Ia"
truth % the matter charged t. b" libel
Ions la 1876 10y express rtHtut" H."
common law wAs put ~ lore" III TIA" ter
ritory u New MrNcp. Label III u com.
mon law ufcna", nud ny To $3.50 NHr
punishable IA the courts 81 ih" t"ir''
~ IN accordance" with the ru,"r ~ 10,
common lhs, and IA AT! prosecution o."
defendant would not have br"G allowed
70 prove the truth ot hts etaicm"ntr
This being the condition 81 the law, 10
1859 q statute was passed winch mutt
gates the severity % the common law,
and hea excited the hostility uf IT." demo
crate ot New Mexico. Bearing IN mind
that under the law IA 1t stood up Ia That
time the truth ~ statement could not
L. II l. A. Ia III, 1
in n criminal prosecution fur hp",, Sc
call the attention 81 our readers - toe
following quotations from the act ct
1889:
sec. IA II il no offence 10 make
true statements u fact, ~ cNpfrrs upin
ions ~ To the qualifications 81 "a caudi
date Tor any Office or puuhc place. uf az
pointment.'
sec. 10. IL IN no ui'ruc" 10 pubnsh
true statements OF fact ~ h. the 4uDuu
cations Of any person Tor III! occupation,
profession or trade"
"sec. 10. II IL no libel to publish any
statement respecting any Legislative or
judicial proceeding, whether IT," strtr
meut be in fact true or not, unless ~
such statement u charge ~ corruption II
made against some person acting IN
IeHihihtiNe OF .uulClAl Chph'l'g
"Section -. In the following cases,
the truth u any statement charged as n
libel may be shown IN qualification Of
the defendant:
|. Where the publication purports to
bs an invest lgation ~ the Official con
duct of officers or men IN pubic ca
pacity.
2. Where Il 10 stated ia the libel that
person has bsen guilty Of some p-na
offence, and the tliu-, place aud nature
OF the offence 10 ap~ciii.i ia the publIcaI
tioa.
g. Where ~ . stated that a person IL
OF . nOtori"Vs' tad az infamous charac
ter
I. |b. to publication chargee
any pefs - IN ofiice or a candidate there
for, With . want u honesty, or having
h.>a guilty II -puis mali-assnc. IN 81
ice, rendering him unworthy al the
place. In other cas~s the truth 81 the
facts stated IN the libel cannot be IN
quired TOTO.
Doe would thiirk that the democratic
newspapers % the territory having any
hbelous ipcl,nations, u there are any OF
that kind, could find room enough in
side this statute 10 disport themselves Ia
~ ktcdt M eAteut no Nuu" pe 'ohN'h'
ent with the public welfare. IL will he
observed that the terms of the act Iii
rectly contradict the statements inside
In the quotation from our morning con
temporary. Can II be possible that the
writer Of that editorial has never read
the statutsY
We would not feel inclined 10 take ny
any time with this matter, however sr.
ronsous and misleading the publications
OF ignorant aud mendacious journalists
would be, we're IL not for the fact that
the democratic house Of representative
At Santa Fe hAI just pa 'ed bill Tor
the repeal Of the libel law. An unavail.
ing objection 10 the passage Of this bill
was made by member Of the repu blican
minority on the ground that nothing
was offered ~ substitute for the exist
ing Law, but the democratic majority
put itself upon record as desiring 10 re-
turn 10 the severity Of the common Law
rule. A curious thing in this connect iot
10 that the Law sought To he repealed
was copied from a statute Of the great
democratic state of Texas.
E,s laar nns .sna,linp ,,,ay Ia miami