Arizona republican., 1902-12-20
t.t4..s-s-.++4..44++4++.t+++++.t-E4
CURRENT COMMENT
A Practice That Is Out of Date.

I | A few days since one of a small party
 of men remarked that a controversy of a personal nature between the edi-
 tors of newspapers oi any standing
 was a most unusual thing. Another, an older man, remarked that such con
 troversies were quite a feature in newspapers fifty years ago. and noted
 the conflicts between the leading edi- | tors in New York, which sometimes passed beyond abuse in their editorial columns to personal assault. It was observed by another that the better class of newspapers had ceased to vilify the candidates of the opposite party or to relate the gossip deroga- tory to their characters. Criticism by the decent newspapers stops with the public record of candidates.
 All of the foregoing statements are true. A great change has taken place for the better in the conduct of news papers patronized by the more intel ligent readers. They no more like a personal conflict in print between edi- | tors than they would a street brawl in front of their houses. Newspaper managers have also learned that the public has no interest in their personal affairs. and so they have made news paper-making impersonal, the editorial views of a paper being Tn a large meas urc the reflex O: that portion of public opinion with which they are in sym pathy. As for CampaIgn sCanuaIs, ,lic really decent people in both parties were disgusted with them during the Blaine campaign of 1884 The same is true of the better class of campaign speakers. The speaker who has nothing better to offer an audience than a harangue made up of personal abuse of the opposing candidates will not be popular nor will he make con verts.
 The conversation referred to did not end with newspapers and political speakers, but one of the party said to a lawyer who was present: There is one place where the abuse of the oppo- nent is yet tolerated. and that is in the courts of justice" He then gave an account of a verbal assault made in a court where he was a juror upon a re- spectable witness on the other side. The lawyer, who is one of the most highly respected. took exception to the general assumption that lawyers as a rule assail the men of the other side. He declared that the best lawyers do
 
 practice was confined to a class oi practitioners who had no standing in the profession and to q few men who are employed in desperate criminal cases simply because they can abuse and browbeat. This statement is un- dOubtedly true. The better class of lawyers are not viIifers. They realize that blackguardism does not count with an intelligent jury. Moreover, the refining influences of better education are producing men who as jurors no more enjoy the vilification of the prin- cipal and witnesses on the other side than they would a wordy quarrel be- tween filthy mouthed street brawlers. More and more people are coming to realize that the established good char acter of the lawyer as a man in the community in which he lives and his reputation in his profession are two things which secure the respectful at tention of a jury at the outset
 IL may be said in this connection that, no matter what the reputation of the lawyer may be, he mas no right. as did the counsel for the defense in a rOted murder case in New York re- gently, to point his finger at q witness on the other side and declare: There is the murderer in this case" If such charge were made by a newspaper the accused could recover heavy dam ages, and the accuser be heavi- ly fined and sent to prison. Why should an attorney in q court oi jus tice, where even the parties in a suit should be secure against false accusa- tion and where witnesses should be protected. be permitted to assai cha~- acter indiscriminately? Why should not an attorney who goes outsiGa (. . testimony to assail the character of men on the opposite side be made as amenable to the laws for the defatro- tion of character as the citizen outside the court or the publisher of a news paper?-Indianapol Journal.