The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1900-04-15
DO with the failure to secure the lesis-
iation needed.
+. p. Baltic,
Jasper Collins,
H..lAA

Jasper Collins,
Committee.
The finance comrittse. ]. &c. Vernon,
chairman. submitted the following reports:
10 the Texas Press Association.
We. your finance committee, have ex-
apined the books OF the secretary ANA re-
pJrts OF secretary and treasurer. All bills
u4virg been paid there Is now cash In
me treasury OF s301.97 The committee
taxes pleasure in indorslns tho action OF
.ne secretary In providing new ledger
ana OF MS endeavor 10 secure new mem.
bers for the association. the minutes
puoiislcd and distributed BY him ale a
MODEL OF neatness. free from typograph cal
errors ana surely recommend the associa-
tion TO all who may be favored with a
copy. The treasursr's books were not
ueiore the committee. but the report from
mat INDIVIDUAL correspond with the vouch :
gre ana receipts coming under our To-
specuon. We have approved tho accounts
Oh the secretary and vouchers have besn
ISSUED and paid by the treasurer Tor his
expenses and services. The account Of tae
president for sl0.75 for printing. te,,-
grams. postage, etc. has also been ap-
proved and We recommend that sam, bn
palu. II is mater OF congratulation tina.
me nnances Of the association are in such
eAeeiient condition and that the Offices
naFe done such good and faithful work
The report Of the committee on Iibe, IN :
ciuaes letter to Governor Sayers on the
subject and also the full text OF the libel
OH introduced at the last two sessions OF
the legislature. In this connection a re-
marx by Chairman Senter OF the libel COM
nittee may be quoted, In which he stated
tnat Governor Savers has manifested more
interest In the subject than any OF his
predecessors. This Is the report:
10 hon. w. II. Mayes, President.
your special committee on libel legis-
ration oegs to report that In pursuance of
instructions given at your last annual
meeting, we met after the call for spe-
cial session of the Twenty-sixth legisla-
ture and prepared bill which is hereto APP
pendel. Our committee reconvened in Aus
tin and secured an interview with Governor
sayers. who declared his sympathy with
our objects and at once included the SUBJ
lect in message TO the legislature, sub
mitting It for appropriate legislation. In
response to the governors request our
grievances and aims were brteay set forth
u letter TO him. which is also appended
Inc circumstances connected with the
late called session Of the legislature made
1t Impossible 10 secure the passage of any
measure to which any degree OF opposi-
tton was offered. The subject was freely
discussed in both houses, and good &C
We beg to report that the greatest diff
Guilty to be overcome Is the apathy OF the
press ITSELF We believe that an active
and concerted interest on It's part would
result in the prompt passage OF a civil
statute on the subject of libel that would
give some measure of relief against the
present oppressive conditions.
Hon. Jos. d. Sayers, Governor. Austin.
Texas.
Dallas. Texas, February 5, 19Oo.--pear
Sir: The grounds of just complaint that
Texas publishers have against what may
be called the judicial libel law Of Texas
concisely stated relate to
/. The presumption of malice where
malice does not in fact exist. upon which
presumption damages to an indefinite
may be based
2. The presumption of damages where
no damages In fact exist. Under the COM
mon law rule recognized In most other
States and in England this presumption
Extends only to publications that are
classed as libels ''per Sc" BY late de-
cisions Of the courts OF civil appeals In
Texas. which may or may not be finally
upheld by the supreme court, all limlta-
lions arc In effect removed from the opera
ticn OF this rule and the jurles are left to
assess such damages as they choose to
give. without regard to the nature of the
libel. 1t is only necessary that they shall
find that its tendency is to do injury.
(See Brown vs.. Durham, AZ S. W., 3S1l
3. The inclusion of injury to feelings
in actual damages (Belo VS.. Fuller, 10 S.
w 616.) In the case of Houston Printing
company VS.. Moulden al S. w, 3S1) dam
ages were given In the sum OF $1,000, as
actual damages, based solely upon the tes-
timony OF the plaintif that he couldn't
tell how he felt because of the publication;
that he was considerably worried" by
II.
4. The legal imputation by innuendo OF
a meaning TO publications, contrary to the
ordinary rules OF language, TO the intent
of the publishers. and to the understand
ing of the public. [See Dement, VS.. Hous-
ton Printing Company, 81 S. ID. 9S5; A S.
w. sos; Democrat Publishing Company VS..
Jones, IS S. D. 652; Belo VS.. Fuller. 10 S.
w. SIC; Belo VS.. Smith, 40 s. d. $500
5. The lack OF plain, simple rule de-
fning privileged matter.
The Texas doctrine upon these subjects
is in some important respects unsettled.
Some of the decisions of the court OF civil
appeals are at variance with each other,
and others seem TO depart from rules and
the supreme court OF the State. For in
stance. that court in the case OF Zeliff VS..
Jennings (6l Texas 1860 held that 10 be
libel sper Sc a publication must impuLe
moral turpituie, and that it was not suf-
fcent to bring 1t within that category that
Ii should charge q violation OF law. The
crime must be such as would tend to dis
grace the person in the estimation OF So
ciety This doctrine has been 50 changed
by later decisions that no lawyer in Texas
would now dare to undertake TO say what
Is a libel per Sc. justifylng general dam
ages without proof of loss or injury. Pub
fishers have good reason to fear that they
are left absolutely to the mercies OF
jury, which is without legal chart or
compass, but is invested With power to
give free rein to passion or prejudice, and
has the assurance that there is no rule OF
law 10 RESTRAIN It's action, however UNI
Just that may be. The practical erect OF
the law is to subject publisher 10 at
tack in any county In the state, 10 %
selected by the plaintiff, and to sunmlt
the case to twelve citizens with genefai
authority to render such judgment as they
see At to give, the only real function per-
formed by the court being 10 regulate the
selection OF the jury. In no other h1lsa,
ton OF whatever character or however
meritricious may be the conduct com
planned OF, Is there such an entire laek
OF judicial rules controlling the trial anu
the results of the case. II is submitted
that under no other circumstances Ia the