The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1899-10-19
THE SCRANTON TRIBUNE-THURsDAY OCTOBER 1y 1sye

venge or settled anger against a per-
son, yet in it's legal sense 1t means the
doing of an act without a just cause,
wrongfully and wilfully or recklessly.
The man who publishes slanderous
matter, calculated to defame another,
must be presumed to have intended
that which the publication is calculated
to bring about, unless he can show the
contrary, and 1t is for him to do that.
This Is all have to say in this con-
nection about the law of libel
Much has been said in this case about
the freedom of the press. 1t has been
well said that free press is the pride
of a free country. 1t is one of the bull
warks of liberty. The constitution OF
Pennsylvania provides that "the print
ing press shall be free to every person
who may undertake to examine the
proceedings of the legislature or any
branch of the government, and no law
shall ever be made to restrain the
right thereof. The free communica-
tion of thoughts and opinions Is one Of
the invaluable rights of man, and every
citizen may freely speak, write and
print on any subject, being responsible
for the abuse of that liberty"
THE PRESS is FREE HERE.
In some countries the press is not free.
Newspapers cannot criticize even the
official conduct of public officers; CEN
sors are appointed who have the power
to decide what shall or shall not APP
pear in a newspaper, and If they see
fit they have the right to confiscate the
whole edition of u newspaper if their
mandates have been violated. But in
this country, and especially in this
state, the freedom of the press is for
ever secured by constitutional provis-
ions. But the same constitution which
hp frppdnrn nf
also declares that "All men have the
| right to enjoy and defend life liberty,
property and reputation"
A. mans reputation Is as much his
| property as his house and lot. Indeed
| it is considered by some men and most
| men a more sacred possession. 1t Is
| entitled to the protection of the law,
and no man has the right unlawfully
| to injure a person in his reputation
| any more than he has the right to take
| away from him his property. Consid-
| erng that the freedom of the press is
| protected by the organic law of the
| state, and that the reputation of every
| citizen of this commonwealth is equally
! protected by constitutional guarantees,
| it is our duty to inquire how far the
| public press may go in discussing q
| mans character and in exposing him
| to the contempt and hatred of the pub
! lie.
1t is unquestionable that the public
press has great latitude. 1t has the
right to discuss freely all measures re-
| lating to municipal, state and national
| government; it has the right to eX-
! anime, investigate, approve or con-
! denim the official conduct of all men
acting in any public capacity. 1t is its
duty to expose corruption in public
! places and to enlighten the people as to
| all matters of public interest But it
hn no oh tn in a N l.
tation without just cause. 1t has no
right to expose him to public contempt
and hatred unless he deserves it.
IT OWES A DUTY.
The press owes a duty to every in
dividual citizen. If it is about to pub
| lish anything derOgatory to the char
| aCter or reputation of q citizen it is
it's duty first to investigate the acCu-
sation and to use every reasonable
means to verify the truth thereof be-
fore publication. If it fail in this par
ticular and the publication is of de-
famatory character, and if the publ
cation be made in negligent, careless
or reckless manner or in a Vindictivo
spirit, then the law presumes that the
publication was made maliciOusly and
the publishers are guilty of libel.
Nevertheless, newspaper publisher
has a right to explain the circum-
stances under which the publication
was made: he has the right to Offer
evidence to rebut the presumption OF
malice which arises from the character
of the publication itself, and if it be
found that he published the article in
good faith, that he exercised proper
care in the investigation and the veri
| fiCattOn of the subject matter of the
article, and that his intention was
simply to enlighten the public, and that
from an honest motive, he may be ac-
quilted of the charge of publishing q
malicious or defamatory libel.
Coming to the evidence in this cast
the first question for you to decide is
as to whether the defendants are re-
spOnsible for the publication of the ar
ticle complained Of in this case. The
defendants are Richard Little ant
| Michael j. OToole. There is no ques
tion about the connection of Richart
Little, one of the defendants, with tn
newspaper called the Scrantonian. HI
admits upon the witness stand that h,
is the editor and sole proprietor AM
was such in july and August of thi
year.
He admits writing one of the articles
set forth in the indictment; but tn
responsible connection of the other de
fendant with the Scrantonian is denied
Was Michael j. O'Toole responsible il
any way for the writing, production o
| publication of the alleged libel? Yol
, have heard the testimony upon thi
: point. Mr. O'Toole himself goes upOl
t | the witness stand and tells you tina
2 he is only an employe of Mr.. Little, an
that he works on the Scrantonian a
the rate of fifteen dollars per week
2 that although he is named as associ
l | ate editor in the columns of the paper
S he is to all intents and purposes onl
a reporter occasionally doing editoria
= work. He is corrobOrated by Richar
Little himself.
! THE SOLE OWNER.
f Mr.. Little says that he is the sol
= owner Of the paper, and that MI
O'TOole is in his employ at the wage
= / have already mentioned. If this con
L tention is correct, then it will be you
duty to acqut Michael ]. OToole, he
} cause if he is only an employe on tn
e paper he cannot he convicted. But tn
= evidence of Mr.. Little and Mr.. O'ToOl
5 is not the only testimony in the case
r MIR. Schoch testifies that at Harrisbur
Y before the investigating committee Nj
4 O'Toole swore that he was assoCiat
Y editor of the Scrantonian, and tha
= when the paper was shown him he SAID
\ This is our paper"
e But Mr.. O'ToOle says the same thin
S today; he admits that he is assoCiat
/, editor of the paper, and counsel for tn
), defendants claim that the eXpressiO
t This is our paper" is of very little &C
= count. The most important testimOn
e is that of Jacob Gilman, who says tina
), in conversation with Mr. O'Toole tn
s latter informed him that he had writ
o ten up Mr., Ripple on the previous sun
f day, which would be July 80, and tht
4, he was going 10 write him nm again