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

Two football teams struggling for the
pigskin. There is a disposition to dc
the fair thing both by the paper
guilty of libel and the party libelled
though the method proposed to dc
justice to either party is a little crude
sort of handmade with inadequate
tools.
1t is proposed that when a person
has been libelled, the paper guilty OF
the offense shall make a full and COM
prete retraction of the offensive mat
ter, and this retraction is to be printed
in bold-faced type, the boldness OF
the type to correspond with the bad
ness of the libel, in fact, to be ar
ranged on a graduated scale. For
example, some paper might say of
John Smith:
John Smith is not good citizen;
he does not pay his debts, as the rec
ords of the court show; he is a man
whom no one respects, whom no one
trusts; in fact, a man whom all dis
trust''
There is a technical libel John goes
to the paper guilty of it and demands
a legal retraction, threatening suit
for damages in case of refusal. The
paper would make the amende honor
able very cheerfuIly, and in about
these terms, and in bold-faced type:
Yesterday we said of Mr.. John
Smith: "John Smith is not a good
citizen; he does not pay his debts,
as the records of the court show;
he is man whom no one respects,
whom no one trusts, in fact man
whom all distrust" We hasten to
retract the above, having satisfied
ourselves we were wrong. MI.
Smith is not only good citizen but
an eminent one; the judgments
standing against him on the rec
ords of the courts are the result of
suits brought for the purpose of
blackmail. He is a man whom all
respect and whom his friends, who
are legion, would delight to honor,
could he be prevailed upon to stand
for any Office. Internationally Mr..
Smith was done an injustice, his
character is too high, his position too
well established to have done him
any injury, and it is regretted exceed
ingly. Mr.. Smiths name is almost
household word, and anything we
might say about him would neither
add to nor detract from his reputa-
ton. This retraction we chee1fully
make, and our columns are omen to
Mr.. Smith at any time to make what
ever explanation he may see fit.
That retraction, which would meet
every requirement of the law, pub
lished for seven consecutive DAYS,
would weary John Smith before they
expired. The first or second day no
one in particular would notice it, but
by the third day all of Johns friends
and enemies would have noticed it.
By the fourth day all his acquaintance
would be inquiring what was the
trouble, having been, UP to the time
in all likelihood, that any
libel had been published about him.
The fifth, the sixth and the seventh
days he would be so mad as the result
Of the many inquiries by kind
friends" and the general no
toriety he had acquired, unenviable
because every one would
know that everything said about him
was true, as it is in ninety-nine cases
out of a hundred when newspaper
libels a person, that he |
would want to kill somebody. And then |
The paper wouldn't do a thing" to |
John Smith by way of calling atten-
The retraction would eventually prove /
10 be an Old Man of the Sea upon |
Johns back. Then John would feel so
happy, so honored to have the retrac-
ion published as a serial, and to have
lis friends salute him: John, is the
PAPER still running that retraction as
continued story?" This provision is
lot such a one as should be enacted
nto law; it really looks as though it
we're an attempt to humiliate the press
If the state. Not one paper in thou
;and has any intention of injuring a
nan by any article it may publish
lbout him, and whenever any paper of
standing finds that it really has done
Inyone an unintentional wrong, it is al
ways ready and willing to make any
eparation in its power. The present
aw on the question of libel has proven
to all, and it has the full
of every paper in the
tate No paper has sought through
harp practice, 10 injure anyone and
hen attempted to seek protection be-
ind the law. It is a very just and
quitable law and serves as a protec-
ion to persons and papers alike. 1t
hould be allowed to stand as it is
The press of this state is not seeking
0 injure anyone and will not and the
act is that the people complain more
ecause the press is often less stringent
/ its criticisms of men and things
han they would like. This is so be-
ause the press is anxious to avoid do
his provision would be more liable to | !
revoke libel suits than the present
Lw, because no self-respecting paper I
-ould be apt to make any such humil- ]
lting retraction as it calls for; the ]
aper would prefer to fight the suit ,
, making such an apology every time. {
TREET CAR VESTIBULE LEGIS-
LATION. {
1t is proposed to pass law COM {