The record-union., 1896-03-24

amend, Art I.) Every citizen may
freely speak. write and publish his SEN
tfments on all subjects, being respon-
sible for the abuse of that right, and
no law shall be passed to restrain or
abridge the liberty of speech or of the
press" (Cal. ConSt., Art. l., Sec. -
Freedom to speak and publish their
sentiments are essential to the enjoy
ment of liberty by a liberty loving peo-
pie. To guard against any possible en-
croachment upon this cherished and
most valued prerogative it is preserved
to the people by the organic laws of the
land. The founders of the nation would
have the press of the country subject
to no censorship. The evil workings
of such a system were all too visible
at that time as at the present in the
European Governments in which it ex-
lists Moreover, it was well considered
that in a self-governing nation abso-
lutte freedom for the interchange of
ideas, for instruction and persuasion,
was vital to the growth, development
and stability of our institutions. Thus
we came to have as part OF our heritage
such phrases as "a muZzled press,
"strangling free speech" "a seryile
press''-terms at which the very chill
dren shrink and shudder. Like O'Con-
nor's epithet, ''naufragous villain"
without understanding their meaning,
they recognize them as words of sol
emn and awful import.
These truths are but platitudes so
we'll are they known and understood
There can be no fear that they will be
either overlooked or forgotten, and
they should not be. The press itself
should need ever arise will see that
they are not.
But there is an diverse of the picture
which is not so often looked at. This
enormous power has brought with it
corresponding responsibilities. Do the
newspapers WELD that power with just
regard for the duties which 1t entails
upon them? If they do not then the
wrong is a great one, for libelous
publication in a single issue of news
paper serves to set wagging the thou
sand tongues of Slander which there
after can never be silenced even by
the power which moved them to utter
ance BY one who lived to experience
the evil of which he wrote, it is said:
MEMS regulations are tender things,
and ought to be like Christ's coat, with
out seam. Who can see worse days
than he that, yet living, doth follow
the funeral of his reputation" Qord
Bacon's charge against Lumsden.)
AS the law stands, pecuniary COM
pensation is all that can be had for
libel however DANA aging it may be. But
no one pretends that this compensation
re-establishes the injured man or re-
habilitates his reputation. The damage
done may be and frequently is irrepara-
BILE.
In this case appellant asks for such
an extension of the law as would give
immunity to publishers of lfbels pro-
vided express malice in the publication
be absent In other words, his conten-
ton resolves itself to this, that news
paper is purveyor of news; the people
have the right to read the news; any
story cleaned by a reporter as this was
CLEANED and published in the ordinary
course of newspaper business, without
personal malevolence against the vic
tim of the tale, should be held privi-
legged.
In support of this contention there is
neither authority, law, nor justice. No
this case and those which protect pub
Usher who in good faith discusses the
habits, qualifications and official con-
duct of a person holding a public office
or presenting himself as a candidate
therefor. Even in the latter cases a
Zine must be drawn between hostile
criticism upon public conduct and the
imputation of bad motives or offenses
|.
ferred from the conduct" (Neeb VS..
Hope, Ill Penn. ST., 145) But to ex-
tend this doctrine and to seek to apply
ii as here to a charge infamous in it's
nature and false in it's facts against a
private individual, would be to put
upon the people greater evil than that
which the Constitution sought to pre-
vent
The contention is completely disposed
of in this State by the case of Wilson
VS.. Fitch al Cal. 363). In the same
connection the following language of
the Supreme Court of Michigan, in Nc
Allister VS.. Detroit Free Press Com
pany &c Mich, 33S) is opposite:
1T is argued that newspaper in this
day and age of the world, when people
are hungry for the news, and almost
every person is a newspaper reader,
must be allowed some latitude and more
privilege than is ordinarily given under
the law of libel as it had heretofore
been understood. In other words, be-
cause the world is thirsting for criminal
items, and the libel in newspaper is
more far-reaching and wide-spreading
than it used to be when tales were only
spread by the mouth, or through the
medium of books or letters, there should
be greater immunity to gossip in the
newspapers, although the harm to the
person injured is infinitely greater than
it would be if published otherwise
1.-The greater the circulation the