The sun., 1898-02-20
p.r.l. ,ry Of III. county ws.ro ,ha crime Va. com

%Ssp case
RSS s is SSSsS S6s SSG sRsns
say that we ought met, net stS to change that that; The
lions, and has decided that i6oi@f viii read sec
ton 13s-shall bo tried In ono of two counties,
oer h the the
but tho defendantcan, by giving security, have
so tried where The
n may have The Place Of t5 tho
tho stato WSSs sas S Ro OP0R PSe TS" Is
ri tried IN the county whore tho paper is printed.
psS upon ha S o p ''
Senator Elsworth-You do not think that
Mr.. Bartiett"i don't think II should.
Senator Ellsworth-tf this bill should become
q law, you think TINT all communichnts Of this
SsgaS SsppSnsd c DO SSy ypSS
have It determlnsd by . Buffalo Jury
can M SEQ sf no oSicction II {" "ii Il. / think it
would give the newspaper no undue ad.
nF tSs as. Il Il soansS Y ars plsy ss fair In
suits. Besides. It may be assumed that under
hs S 4 i SsSs 9Ss s Il SGs td %rsS He
will be certain to DO convicted unless the trial
Justice decides that the act 10 pneonstitntional
Senator Ellsworth-Let me suggest this: A
Grand Jury In the northern part OF this State.
paper. That Grand Jury. having in view that
which affects tho morals OF tho community
IN tho
class Of business which is condemned BY
ss s Sap.r fw s S ,oo mile. sSay
perhaps IN another community. with possibly
different views. different ideas. different intcll
newspaper is absolutely printed and published
from which was drawn the body Of men com.
posing this Grand Jury. with their views. their
ideas, and their grades Of intelligence to act
Mr.. Bartlett-I remember an experience had
In one OF the northern counties of tho State
eomo years ago. The minute arrived In town
] knew there would DO a verdict against tho de-
fendant. We tried the case with great labor. 1
assist me. made up my mind at that time that
the chances Of New York paper in the country
civil suit jures are very apt to 20 against the
Imagine that In some country district tho
Grand Jury meet and they look over the file OF
a paper and say: "Well. We don't like It; It
doesn't appeal to us; and here i has said some;
we will stamp our disapprobntion upon this sort
OF publication. . Sow will indiet the paper right
| strongly in favor OF q convictions: and l think
| that everything that can be done to lessen the
chances Of unnecessary conviction should be
| done.
Senator Ellsworth-To follow your theory to
that not only should the trial Of such indict:
ments be had, but that no indictments should
be found by any Grand Jury exeep, it s,ia was the
tion was first hedf Isn't that almost neccs-
| sary consequence
| 1t is hardly a consequence.
Senator Ellsworth-You have as fair a right
circulation is had. the finding of the indictment
is based upon pGoper views and proper motives
so nsse nc single
| Mr.. Bartlett-I do not assume. Senator, that
indictments would be improperly found. l do
1 Ynf hnt nj n
found. And it seems to me that the existing law
| covers the case.
the existing law provides. whenever an indict-
| ment is found for a libel. that there may be a
tion was first issued. Is that fair on this theory
| which present to you
Penal Code is satisfactory. How can we assume
that these provisions. enacted with 80 much
care by the IL legislature ,L arG not wise
| that any enactment by the Legislature was not
wise in its day. You may conceive that 1t may
| be otherwise now. because the Legislature IL
| constantly changing enactments made in the
past. you know. That is o large part of our
Mr.. Barliett-There are one or two moro
| points to which / wish to allude. One is the
e Sas deeaed the
ture can make certain things presumptive evi-
denee in civil seton but do no. know any
Legislature can make anything presumptive
evidence in criminal case or conclusive evil
the forfeiture OF the charter. to be brought by
the Attorney C eneral OF the State. it is provided
thereof % shall be Conclusive evidence to the At.
| torney-General or to any court that such
is They
make 1t ,presumptiyc evidence in a civil suit,
but in this seventh section it is made con:
a more serious matter. that an indictment for n
new crime-whicb have no doubt Senator Ellis.
worth will conceded TO be a new crime-may be
had from the failure to publ ish statement of
the editors or owners or publishers of a news
Now in reference to that new statutory crime
1t is provided that upon the trial OF any indict-
| ment the statement In any paper that the de-
| fendant 10 tho owner, proprietor, or editor
| thereof is presumptive evidence of the facts 30
stated. Now, am certain that in n criminal
| case the Legislature cannot enact what shall be
For ali the reasons which have stated trust
and venture TO hope that this bill will not
become law. or course. am aware that 1t
| is no answer to the Lcgislature-it has been
or unjust; but do appeal to you, gentlemen
OF the committee. from another standpoint. II
is now now , argument. and ! have no dou6!
and consideration. But there are certain things
which the Legislature cannot do. and will call
your attention to one or two decisions Take
the case of tho People against Cippcrly !37th
Hun. $40. where the General Term of the Third
| Department said:
sion OF evidence but cannot compel the trial court to
rssara to ahas courts eonvcton or Judgment as
its concusivenes II the Legislature can compel the
courts render judgment contrary TO their convic
tions OF the truth. produced by the evidence then
Legislative power can coerce the judicial power
proposition destructive OF the coordinate depart
ments OF tho Government (D. 323).
1t was held by the Court of Appeals In Hand
agains. Ballou In IL New York that 1t is within
the power OF the Legislature 10 declare in a civil
case what shall be prcsumptive evidence. The
Court did not 20 any further. But IL seems to
me that the language necessarily implies that
in criminal case the LEGISLATURE cannot de-
clare What shall be presnmptive evidence
what shall be conclusive evidence.
/ really think that the great danger of this
class OF legislation is that IT is too general
don't sec how you can convict mon OF general
offences. 1t leaves tho Issue too much open tC
prejudice. You must remember ono thing thai
clear as the intent of the law may be, il 1t Il
dangerous in principle. 1t should not be enacted
DAD WRIG HI'S LIGHTyING STROKE
Tho Many Things That u Did Besides Curtnl
| Ris Rheumntism.
Tforn the Louisriile ErfninO Post.