The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-03-09

oiodn7 FRoyIdnce, responded sew
eral members.
O'Brien declared the railroad com.
mittee had violated its pledges.
This motion shows bad faith on the
part of these folks, who are looking
after the interests of the railroads.
was Mangan's blunt declaration, and
he added: They gave US to under
stand that if this bill was brought ur
again they would not move to strike
out these sections"
Greer declared that he had been
given to understand by the chairman
of the railroad committee that they
would not attempt to strike out these
sections.
Duffin wanted the sections stricken
out, but he had not been aware of the
agreement mentioned, and if there
had been such an agreement he wanted
to see it carried out, as he believed in
fair play.
Wilson reiterated emphatically that
Kimball had assured him that no at
tempt would be made to strike out
| these sections. He would now with
draw his substitute motion to strike
out the enacting clause and ask that
the roll be called on the motion to
strike out the sections, Ito see
whether these people who make prom
ises propose to keep them
FROM THE POPULISTS.
Thomson gave the so-called railroad
ring some pretty hard raps. 81 can
not see," said he, why those who are
working here in the interest of the
railroads should try to deceive mem
bers of this house. We had been as
sured by the chairman of the railroad
committee that no attempt would be
made to strike out these sections. He
has not moved to strike out, but his
right hand bower has made the mo-
j ton"
Il want to know what is a right
hand bower" inquired Sloan, raising a
laugh at Thomson's expense.
Roylance declared he made the mo-
ton to strike out in good faith, and not
because he was Kimbalrs right hand
bower" He was not working for the
/ interests of the railroads, but for the
interests of the people.
Kenner claimed that unless these
sections were stricken out some of
the low grade mines of the state would
be closed down, as they must have
reduced rates in order to enable them
to operate.
Lennon denied this statement, and
declared there was nothing whatever
in these sections that would prohibit
reduced rates for these mines. 1t
was simply proposition that shippers
should be served alike under like cir
cumStances.
Sloan stated that he would vote to
retain these sections because under
them the railroads could do exactly
as they pleased, and the courts would
be filled with litigation.
Roll was then called on the motion
to strike out the sections prohibiting
discrimination, resulting in the defeat
of the motion by vote of Is to &c,
as follows:
q
Gibson, Greenwood, Kenner, Mrs. La
Barthe, Lund, Martin, Maxfield, Muir
dock, Robinson, Roylance, A. P. Soren-
son. Wheeler-15.
Navs-Daniel Cook. Greer. Dot
son, Forshee, Hardy, Hopkin, o. G..
Kimball, Joseph Kimball, Lennon
Mangan, Mckay, O'Brien, Oveson,
Parry, Price. Ray, Romney, Shepard,
Stewart, Sloan, n. c. Sorenson, Thorn
son, Thoreson, Wilson, Perkins-26.
"a SECTION RESTORED.
Sloan again attacked that section
which required the railroads to build
fences and still held them liable for
stock killed, and A. P. Sorenson moved
to reconsider the vote by which the
section was amended. He remarked
that the members were too free with
their accusations. He did not believe
that any oe them were bought by
the railroads. His motion prevailed,
and the section was restored to it's
original form, which relieved the roads
from liability for stock killed when
they fenced their tracks.
Then Murdoch offered a substitute
for the section, which made the roads
responsible for all stock killed, maxi
ing no requirement as to building
fences. This substitute was adopted,
after Sloan had expressed the belief
that nd ba
bill was then passed by a vote of sc
to 6, Sloan giving notice of a motion
TO reconsider.
The conference committees report on
the code amendments was then taken
up, and nearly all of the recommended /
tons were agreed to without discus
sion. The subjects that provoked con-
troversy We're the newspaper libel law, |
the antitrust law and a new section !
to the labor law, holding corporations /
liable for injuries to employees under /
certain conditions
THE LIBEL LAW
The committee recommended the re-
irstatement of the new spaper libel law.
with an important amendment. AS
amended, the publisher, in order to es-
cape liability for more than actual !
damages, was required to publish a
retraction of the article complained |
of, in the second column of the edi-
torial page, for seven publications, in
type as large as that in which the
ibelous article was printed, and headed
by the word "Retraction,' in black
type. Reference TO the retraction in
the local columns was also required.
Kenner and Dresser protested against
this amendment, and the former moved
that the committee report be rejected.
Sloan explained in what manner the
amendment changed the law.
Dresser thought the old law, requir-
ing the retraction to be published once
in as conspicuous place as the libel
1us article, was sufficient.
Kenner appealed to the friends of the
newspapers, IF they have any on this
1oor," to defeat this amendment. 1t
would result in actual loss to the news
papers through some innocent error.
This repeated publication would injure
he standing and prestige of any paper.
The provisions of the old law were
sufficient.
Shepard explained that the amend
nent was not aimed at good papers,
lut at papers that libelled people. I'm
Ter the old law a newspaper could
ear down a reputation that had re-
luired 40 years to build up, and the
'etraction might not be read by half
he people that read the libel. A news
)aper man Che would mention no
lames) had told him he thought the
I'D law was a vicious one.
Sloan admitted that he drew up the
amendment, because his two colleagues
N the committee favored it, and not
ecause he thought it was just or
light.