The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-03-08
THE NEWSPAPER GAG LAW.
,,rETrYG OF STATE EDITORS AND
PUBLISHERS IN ALBINE.

...inst the passage by the Legislature OF tho
riI,Worth Anti.Newspapcr bill was entered at q
..so,ing held here to-day OF publishers and
.a,,ors from oil parts OF the State and OF both
.%o,itical parties. Strong resolutions setting
tS,h The reasons why the entire press Of the
state is opposed to this unprecedented and un.
S...,sary piece OF legislation woro adopted
sUanimously. Nearly every newspaper in the
s,.,. was represented. The meeting was an
ssrnest and harmonious one, resulting in the
.,,,,.llization OF an undivided and decided
..rtiment among the newspapers Of the State
=. opnosition to the bill. Even the country
-0stlies we're represented in large numbers,
- their petition is just as urgent as that OF
an. bu dailies that the proposed pross gag law
4. defeated. Among those present at the meet
Inc or heard from in denunciation of the Ellis.
~or,b bill werc the following publishers, editors,
a, representatives of tho leading dsilies:
franklin Bartlett OF THE Sun md II EVEN
,xa Sun, New York city; L. Prentiss Bailey,
tr,ica Observer: A. W. Monks. WRtcrtown
Standard; +. II. Butler, Buffalo Ne,rs; VIII
Ham Barnes, Jr.. Albany Erenino Journal and
MornipO Express; James c. Farrell.s Albany
Ircus: D.. S. Hasbrouck, Troy Times; e. L.
Murlin, New York Tribune; Norman E. Mack,
BuAslo Times; John II. Farrell. Albany Times.
I;uior; Charles +. Ratigan, Auburn Bulletin:
r r. Willard, Rochester Democrat and Chron-
;,,. William A. Jones. Syracuse Post; w. II.
nreenhow. Hornellsville Tribune; Otto A.
Never. Utica Press; John A.. Sleicher, Frank
I.slie's U'eekly: William ]. Arkoll of Judge;
Arthur Jenkins, Syracuse Herald job +.
Nash. Syracuse Courier; Charles b. Smith.
Bufalo Courier. Record, and st. Clair Nickel
way. Brooklyn Eagle.
II was deemed best to seek to defeat the bill at
is supposed fountain head, and tho Republican
editors present will personally request the
leaders OF the Republican State organization to
withdraw their reported support of tho measure
On the ground that its enactment would not
only be suicidal from u party standpoint, but
would in reality tend to strengthen the Demo
cratic position next fall with the press of the
State, and give to Richard Croker Just the op-
~portunity he has been longing for, to throttle
those newspapers which have been SO unsparing
IN their criticisms OF his public career.
The meeting was in session for over Eve hours.
and the provisions of tho bill were discussed in
feet OF the bill was given by Mr.. Bartlett, who
reviewed his argument before the Senate Judi
ciary Committee in opposition to the measure.
Many OF the editors were amazed at the far.
reaching effect OF tho bill. and were not aware
that under its provisions the newspaper proper
ties throughout tho State could practically be
oonhscated, once the machinery Of the proposed
law was put in operation.
John II. Farrell. the Chairman of the meeting,
on motion OF Z. Prentiss Bailey. appointed the
following committee to draft the sentiment OF
the editors in resolutions c~ondemning the bill:
Franklin Bartlett, A. w. Monks, James C..Far-
rsll. Charles +. Ratigan, L. S. H~asbrouck, Nor
man T. Mack, Z. II. Butler, and L. Prentiss
Bailey. After a recess Mr.. Bartlett, as Chair
man Of the committee. reported the following,
which was unanimously adopted:
We representatives OF newspapers throughout the
State Of New York. irrespective OF party. who are met
together in the city of Albany on this 7th day OF
March. 1898, do resolves:
Whereas. There is now under consideration In the
State Senate q certain bill or proposed act. entitled
"An act to prohibit and punish the publication and
dissemination Of lcentious, indecent. and degrading
papen" Senate bill 1eO. Reprint SEQ. generally
Known a the Ellsworth Libel bill; and
W1Teas. We have carefully examined the va.
rOus provisions Of said proposed law now. therefore,
of resolved:
fint-That the elimination Of the word "lIbelous'
from the original bill does not In any way affect the
scope or operation OF the bin and does not remove
the objections 10 the proposed legislation hereinafter
Get forth.
second-Thatt the bill IL unconstitutional because 1t
restraints and abridges the freedom or liberty of the
press, and thus violates section 8. Article l.. OF the
Constitution. which has been part OF our organic law
since the adoption Of the legislation OF 1921.
Ihird-rhe bill is unconstitutional because It de-
priVes us OF the main safeguard which provides that
in all criminal prosecutions and Indictments for
hoeS the truth may be given in evidence to the
jufJ'an II it shall appear to the Jury that the mat
YER charged as nbelous is true. and was published
with good motives and for justiAable ends. the party
shall be acquitted" Under the Ellsworth BILL an in.
eicted editor or publisher could not prove the truth
ofIny publication.
foarth-The Ellsworth bill violates these elemental
principles OF right and justice which guarantee Ito
every man accused the right to know OF what crime
heh accused In order that he may defend himself
ma Justify his action, and. further. in order that he
may not be arraigned q second time for an alleged
oaehce AFTER a prior a%cquittal. The bill provides for
'nan'ment FOR no SPECIFIC offence. for publishing no
particular words. but because OF general dlsfavor.
fhih-Ihe Ellsworth bill is wicked and pernicious,
oecause under It the defendant would be convicted
"'noat any proof OF guilt. A file of q paper, any
lumber thereof. or any extract therefrom, can be
tNent 70 the Jury. and such evidence will be sufficient
OBSCURE a conviction. although each of the twelve
iurymen might convict upon q different article and
Tor q different offence.
aih-Words written or published are the acts
.aHn make the offence OF libel, and beyond every
'n''sH legislation exists the right to have the words
s0mpiained OF set forth in the Indictment and the
v'o"'ote that such words actually were published
. accused. In q free country no man should be
nae'ed or tried for alleged general badness.
'o'euth-The second section of the bill, compelling
so daily publication by every newspaper Of the
names Of every owner, proprietor, publisher and
sl."f OF such paper, under penalty OF nne and i'm.
pHsonment, creates a new and fantastic crime md