The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-07-01
QUEER THINGS IN LAW.

in the name of the law.
Justice is not always secured at the
bar which is supposed to dispense it.
The liberty of the press leads to
exposure of evil and the protection of
the people from fraud and crime.
The license of the law frequently
works the grossest injustice through
the cover which hedges about
limbs OF the law permitting them to
strike maliciously and ferociously and
with impunity. Lawyers are permit
ted by the courts to say the most
scandalous and untruthful things
against innocent people whom they
have been employed to prosecute.
To illustrate some of these points
one has only to look over scores of
petitions filed in the courts. or to
listen for a few moments to the
harangues of certain lawyers who
practice with immunity.
A case in point is the recent suit of
Annie Oakley against this paper. The
public generally was surprised at the
verdict, and the papers generally de-
nounced it as they should. One paper
says: This verdict is an outrage and
reflection on the intelligence of peo-
pie who make up juries. The mis-
d
no lack of care on the part of the
papers of the country
This statement is partly true, but the
action of the jury does not necessarily
reflect upon it's intelligence when the
jury is not permitted to consider all
the facts which it should properly have
before it in arriving at a just conclus-
ion.
Another paper says: LAS soon as the
State Journal found that it had made
a mistake in identity, it did all in its
power to rectify the result of the error.
The jury having all the facts before it,
returned a verdict of $1,000
But the jury did not have all the
facts before it and could not get them.
The Interpretation of the court prevent
ed important facts from. being placed
before the jurors.
This is one of the queer things about
the law.
The writer was an important witness
in his own behalf. He was sworn to
tell the truth and the whole truth,
but the court would not permit the
whole truth to get before the jury. On
occasions when this witness
was about to tell the whole truth the
and Smith, would object to permitting
the witness to answer under the usual
legal lingo that such answer was
wholly immaterial. irrelevant and in
In almost every instance
the court sustained this objection of
the attorneys for the prosecution and
refused to permit the witness to open
his mouth to tell the whole truth. These
objections were made by the lawyers
and sustained by the court in connec-
ton with the introduction of evidence
which was highly material, wholly
relevant and entirely competent, in
our non-legal opinion.
This case is now out of court. This
has paid the $1,000, and all
the costs, and is therefore not trying
it in the newspaper" He was unable
to explain to the jury in mitigation of
the error, the most important and
practically only points in his defense.
In as much as the verdict of the
jury is a reflection upon the paper.
we do not desire it to go unchallenged
before our thousands of readers; SO
these remarks are made. Before that
jury it was merely a matter of dollars
and cents. Before our readers it is
value the good opinion of our sub
scribers in their belief that this paper
is carefully conducted by careful re-
porters and a careful staff, whose
greatest desire is to publish the truth |
and to publish the news accurately. !
far above the opinion expressed in
dollars and cents by that particular
jury. We consider the jury a good
one, but what can a jury do if the
facts are withheld from it?
The Annie Oakley case developed |
largely into one of fortune hunting |
The lawyers for the woman did not |
ask for a correction or retraction- |
I'VE want monetary damages" said |
one of the New York attorneys to the |
writer when pressed for facts, and in |
response to a statement that we had |
evidently made a mistake and wanted |
to know all of the circumstances SO
that we could publish a correction |
and retraction, and do it in a way |
which would really make amends and /
not be a perfunctory statement.
The Topeka lawyers took no pains
to acquaint the State Journal with |
The facts when asked for a correct
version, and when the writer visited |
me pla1nIlu dIIOIIeyS III new OTk
10 show his lack of malice and desire
10 set the matter right, he was met |
with equal Indifference so far as any
was desired.
When a newspaper makes a mis-
lake rejecting upon an individual, the
natural thing for the individual to do
8 to ask for a correction, and the
natural and proper thing for the
newspaper, upon satisfying
Itself of the error, is to publish the
In this case the State
Journal published the retraction. 1t
IN hlished it in a far more irnnnrta Mt