New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-11-03

to the opposite extreme. The law ~ July 70.
1881. insures absolute freedom Of the press
Every Fronchman is at liberty. after merely
giving public notice. TO publish newspaper. re-
naming answerahe to jury Gin most cases.
for any offences or msdemeauors his Journal
may commit
NJ PEYRAMONTs CASE
The inadeQuacy Of the Press Law. OF 1851 hrs;
became apparent in 1885, when VI. Peyramont.
Editor ~ the 'Reyanche" caused a sensation
by grossly insulting the German Emperor and
announcing that 10y A vote ~ 7oGsO against
l6o22 the provinces Of Alsace and Lorraine
had senifed determination to throw of Ger
man allegiance and return to France The
"Revanche' appealed 10 the Paris mob TO make
a demonstration in favor % Alsace- Lorraine and
against Germany The French Cabinet In or
der 10 preserve peace endeavored to suppress
the "Revanche' But IT was discovered that
none OF the seventy-odd articles Of the Press law
applied 10 the case The Procureur General
happened 20 recollect that an obscure law en-
acted in $50 CArticle - q the Penal Code pro-
vides that any person who by hostile acts not
approved by the Government makes the state
liable to a declaration Of war shall be banished
from French territory. and II war ensues shall
be confined in penal colony" It was by virtue
q this forgotten law that Peyramont tried.
He was nevertheless acquitted by the jury. Dur
ing the Wilson scandals tho Boulanger move
ment and the Panama affair more than six hun
cred and ninety libel suits were brought before
the courts and in almost every instance the re-
suit was an acquitta or purely nominal son.
tence The most violent class Of newspapers prof
tied by the circumstances. and their language
became more and more abusive until the climax
was apparently reached during the Dreyfus ar
fair The result Is that the duel remains
the only recognized remedy in France for news
paper libel
/, may be noted that tho Zola trial is almost
the only instance IN which thu maximum son
,ence for libel has ever been given by French
jury This verdict was subsequently set aside
Bat the extraordinary circumstances which sur
rounded the lola trial make that case note
worthy exception % the rule. II will 10 re-
memhered that lola was tried under the article
Of the Press law Of 1851 which provides that
'le- against the constituted authorities may
ho punished 10y Imprisonment from eight days
o. ono year and with fines Of from loo TO 1000
francs owing to tho inaamed state of public
opinion and 70 the tremendous moral pressure
brought io bear upon the jury the court ~
first instance inflicted the maximum sentence.
which Was. however subsequently annulied on
- ,. &c.. 49,. 60. g ..oeeo.fo.
,7'i''''a' ;. 'D'''' '' '''' '"'
,'N "''NS .''7 s 7-,.
"'''-', w." Dbl" '''', , =, ~,
was me" W. 20. 100
i''."''4' '' ........,.-,ar,oos
an" "'.7'1'' w '''' 80 @ ''. ,.,.. 60 ..o
mat the h'ae's'ra'r gave ''''''.
p'a'n'ln' 'u' ae'''''u ''e
me Gays imp anu "
PROVISIONS OF THE PRESENT Law
49,, 49,. . Glands iihels
-.a.......s a,,.ho-,.ios or nubIica-
g <a,-,ea1 document. ,,aliciousIv attrib-
..s 80 .....-..,s 70. ,hoi~ real authors are pun
.-ta,.,o r..r .he MAXIMUM, sentence 81 one
s Co., - . 900 francs
yea > ''4'f' '''''''''''' 49,