The record-union., 1895-05-13
A JOURNALISTIC ABUSE.

A Superior Judge in San Francisco was
informed by litigant in his court that
the San Francisco Post had proposed for
$500 to publish q favorable report of the
trial of the litigant. Judge Belcher di-
rected the District Attorney to investi-
gate the incident. The report completely
exonerated the Post, but we have in
formation which we deem reliable that
the District Attorney In his investigation
discovered the unmistakable evidence
that the proprietor of San Francisco
paper did approach the litigant and did
offer for $500 to publish a favorable ac-
count of the proceedings in court in
which he was defendant.
We have repeatedly called attention to
the fact that the metropolitan press. with
perhaps few exceptions, ia in the habit
of taking fee from one side or the other
to controversies concerning wills in
trials where large sums are in issue. We
called attention to the fact that more than
one paper published in the Bay City had
contracts with Florence Blythe Hinck-
ley for the payment Of money to them
upon the contingency of her establishing
her claim az the heir of the Blythe estate.
We can conceive of no abuse more mon
strous than this. The liberty of the press
is one thing, but the license of black
mailers is quite another. When man
arrogates to himself the right to 80 mis-
represent the proceeding in public judi
cial tribunals. that popular opinion will
exercise judgment in that tribunal, he
ia committing crime for which penal
ssrvitude in the State Penitentiary
would be very light punishment
We do not know whether courts can
take cognizance of cases of this kind or
not. We do know, however, that there
are salutary laws against the carrying Of
concealed weapons. and that suoh laws
are based upon the theory that the carry
ing of concealed weapons leads to crimes
against human life, and is a menace to
public safety. A newspaper in the hands
of blackmailer or villifier is far worse
menace to the rights of citizens than re-
volver or bowie knife.
When the Constitution declared that
the rights of life liberty and the pursuit
of happiness were inalisnable. it did not
intend to declare that they could not be
interfered with by the law-making power.
The exercise of every right is under the
principle that individual rights. by the
very fundamental idea of the social COM
pact, have limitations. Freedom ofspeech
and freedom of the press have reasonable
limitations. A litigant in court has a
perfect right to demand at the hands of
the law protection against that species of
Misrepresentation which would deny to
him justice. When the liberty of the
press is a menace to the proper admins
tration of public justice. then the utmost
limit of tolerance has been reached. at
least point at which the application of
legislative restraint would be both wise
and expedient. It should be recognized
as q crime against the highest and best in
terests of society for newspaper to pub
lish Qarbled and misleading statements
of public trial, in order to influence the
course of public justice against the liti-
CANT who refused to respond to its de-
mands for blackmail. When the news
papers can deliver the judgment of a
court to order civil liberty will be at an
and